Deformities & More...

[Keystone Kid]

Who has previous knowledge of other complications deformities bring?

In humans as well as dogs deformities have been “LINKED DIRECTLY” to many other problems: kidney failure, heart defects, liver problems, mental illness, problems with the brain, and much more.

So the next time you breed to that FC, NFC, IFC, or that “top-producing stud” keep the above information in mind. Deformities definitely contribute to all lot of early deaths in dog.

I’m about positive most “well known” breeders are aware of this information, but I’ve never heard them mention the issue. I wonder why?

[Windkist]

Who has previous knowledge of other complications deformities bring?

In humans as well as dogs deformities have been “LINKED DIRECTLY” to many other problems: kidney failure, heart defects, liver problems, mental illness, problems with the brain, and much more.

So the next time you breed to that FC, NFC, IFC, or that “top-producing stud” keep the above information in mind. Deformities definitely contribute to all lot of early deaths in dog.

I’m about positive most “well known” breeders are aware of this information, but I’ve never heard them mention the issue. I wonder why?

I think that your going to have to narrow it down? What type of deformaties are you referring to?

Leah

[gus]

You know why. The same reason there were no responses on the espo board. Follow the money.
I remember an advertisement many years ago when Pearson Creek was the consuming flavor.
Some beagler advertised his FC Pearson Creek XX as one of four or five out of the litter that made Field Champion. His, he bragged, was the only one of the litter that was not blinded by glaucoma.
Unfortunately many of the Field Champions are never ran long enough to test stamina or stress related problems.

[wvduece]

i would have to belive that any deformity will affect something from head to tail some part of the dog will be affected even if its a minor fault jb

[gus]

Breeding problems, whether it be the inability to whelp without assistance, poor mothering instincts, or small sickly litters usually are inherited. If we are trying to improve the breed why keep breeding them? Many problems don't show up as physical structural problems. Folks are routinely mentioning seizures and kidney problems. These are both inherited problems that continue to show up in some of the more popular lines. Why advertise a stud dog that has these problems?

[Ronnyg]

I feel a plug coming to breed to a "National Champion". LMAO!

[APFII]

Who has previous knowledge of other complications deformities bring?

In humans as well as dogs deformities have been “LINKED DIRECTLY” to many other problems: kidney failure, heart defects, liver problems, mental illness, problems with the brain, and much more.

So the next time you breed to that FC, NFC, IFC, or that “top-producing stud” keep the above information in mind. Deformities definitely contribute to all lot of early deaths in dog.

I’m about positive most “well known” breeders are aware of this information, but I’ve never heard them mention the issue. I wonder why?

Sounds like an accsation to some breeder to me. I geues you are not willing to bring what you believe to be true in the open. So why bring it up?

[Beagled1]

Who has previous knowledge of other complications deformities bring?

In humans as well as dogs deformities have been “LINKED DIRECTLY” to many other problems: kidney failure, heart defects, liver problems, mental illness, problems with the brain, and much more.

So the next time you breed to that FC, NFC, IFC, or that “top-producing stud” keep the above information in mind. Deformities definitely contribute to all lot of early deaths in dog.

I’m about positive most “well known” breeders are aware of this information, but I’ve never heard them mention the issue. I wonder why?

Let me just say you're brave for mentioning this and I thank you for bringing this up. All to often we neglect this aspect of our hounds, getting so caught up in what type of hunt they're throwing or whose in their pedigrees. We watch them in the field and they appear healthy to us as young 2yr old dogs, but things are not always as they seem. Let's face it. This is an expensive hobby we all have and sometimes otherwise good breeders loose sight of why they originally got into hounds when they realize that they can sell pups out of FC breedings and make a profit. It's so much easier to make excuses than to CULL a dog that we put our heart and soul into (and not to mention spent quite a bit of $$$ on).

I've only been actively involved in the breed about 5yrs and already I pretty much know which bloodlines and indivigual hounds PRODUCE strong healthy pups in addition to hunt. What are we doing to the breed in the long run if we make excuses for the problems we encounter? I think we're all annoyed that some hounds that are winning field championships aren't true gundogs - but why aren't most of us bothered by the fact that FC So And So is producing dogs with spinal problems? Or worse, has spinal problems or bad knees or a bad heart himself?

Take it for what it's worth but there IS a way of being sure we are breeding dogs that are healthy and consistantly producing sound pups. I don't know any other working breed whose breeders never use the Orthopedic Foundation for Animals (OFA) or Canine Eye Registry Foundation (CERF) to screen their breeding stock. And IMHO, I think it's about time Beaglers caught up to the rest of the dog world. My breeding stock will have health chearences from now on becuase after being in this breed for 5yrs I feel that I take MORE of a financial/emotional risk by NOT paying $30 to get hips, thyroid, or cardiac certifications on my hounds. There is so much that I can unknowingly be passing on, that I just won't take that chance. I really want the best dogs. The way I see it is that health, temperament are the foundations , then comes hunt and/or conformation.

OFA
http://www.offa.org

CERF
http://www.vmdb.org/cerf.html

[Pine Mt Beagles]

KEY STONE KID
THAT IS A VERY GOOD TOPIC .HERE AT PINE MT KENNEL, I BELIEVE IN THE BUCKET PUP OF THE OLD DAY'S .
BEAGLE1----- I HAVE TO AGREE WITH YOU" MOSTLY ANYWAY" I HAVE SAID BEFORE THE LETTERS IN FRONT OF A HOUND DON'T MAKE THE DOG.I HAVE ONLY BREED TO -2-CHAMPIONS IN 30 PLUS YEARS .MOSTLY BECAUSE OF HUNT AND CONFORMATION.

PINE MT BEAGLES

[Beagled1]

Sounds like an accsation to some breeder to me. I geues you are not willing to bring what you believe to be true in the open. So why bring it up?

Why would you believe the OP was trying to accuse a particular breeder? Do you honestly think that health concerns in another breeder's line are of no concern to other Beaglers? This is a question that NEEDS to be brought up, we all have the RIGHT to know. How are we going to improve anything if we keep shut about what is cropping up too frequently in our lines? No one is going to blame a breeder if he innocently breeds a hound that produces a problem. But if he continues to breed with different females out of different lines, and sees the problem is still cropping up, and it's a serious issue, he has a responsibility to cull that hound, no matter what titles it has.

I agree with the OP. Kidney failure is RAMPANT in field lines now. It's insane how often we hear of 6-7 year old dogs dropping dead from it. There are surely other components, but genes are the largest factor. It's become almost epedemic lately. Is that what you want? For the average lifespan of a Beagle to be 6 years? No reputable breeder should ever view the sharing of knowledge as accuatory behavior!


THE BREEDER'S CODE OF SILENCE
By Sierra Milton
http://www.caninechronicle.com/features ... n_404.html

What do most modern-day breeders and the Mafia have in common? What a strange question, you may say. It is, sadly though, a very real commonality. The answer is simply what Padgett, a well-known geneticist refers to as the “Code of Silence” for breeders and perhaps more commonly discussed as “omerta” for the Costa Nostra. Both are deadly silences. It’s easy to understand the reasons for the conspiracy of silence when it refers to criminals, but what reasons can a breeder possibly have for maintaining “omerta”?


The reason most often given for not sharing genetic information is the fear of being made the object of a “witch hunt.” It lies much deeper though. It begins with ownership and the human need to see what one owns as being the best. Remember the “keeping up with the Jones” mentality? Everyone wants the very best and the accolade of owning the best. Admitting that what one owns or has bred may have faults is difficult for most people. Also at fault is the huge financial and emotional investment that breeders have in their dogs. Discovering that there may be defects in the sires and dams that breeders have so much of themselves invested in becomes frightening and causes many to refuse to even contemplate that their dogs may possess defective genes. Egos and fear of being labelled “poor breeders” are ultimately the reasons for breeders maintaining this detrimental code of silence.


Even more dangerous than the Code of Silence though is the refusal to contemplate defective genes may exist within a breeding program and be present for generations, quietly meshing through many bloodlines before manifesting itself. Could it be possible that dogs which appear healthy can actually be spreading dangerous, sometimes lethal genes throughout the breed community until finally two healthy, but gene-defective carriers combine to produce that first tell-tale affected offspring?

Of course it is and time and again the geneticists tell us how this is possible.
Simplistically, breeders cannot see defective genes and what they don’t see must not exist. Therefore using that logic, all the untested dogs must be as beautifully healthy inside as they are structurally beautiful outside. If only that logic were true! Unfortunately, far more emphasis is placed upon structural and superficial beauty simply because it is something that is easily seen, acknowledged and obtained. It’s also something without any “unnecessary” financial investments. One doesn’t need to pay for x-rays or blood tests or specialists’ knowledge in order to evaluate how a dog conforms to a physical standard.
The real danger, though, comes not from those dogs who are tested, but from those breeders who keep their heads in the sand and refuse to believe that their dogs could be less than 'perfect'. We can begin to fix that which we reveal, but that which remains hidden is a threat to the future. But here omerta, that “Code of Silence” is very evident. Not only do these breeders hold fast to the belief that their dogs are untainted by defective genes, structural defects or temperament problems, but they also believe that no dog that they choose to bring into their breeding program through mating with their dogs could possibly be carriers either. After all, they only “breed to the best,” and of course, that best just has to be perfect.


Now the truly criminal act occurs. These breeders are quite often very successful in the show ring; their dogs are thought to be the best – after all, they have ribbons and placings and titles to prove how worthy their dogs are! Because of their show ring success, they are seen as breed authorities, people that newcomers to the breed trust for knowledge and information. And the information these newcomers get is that there are no genetic problems to be concerned with, no need to do that “expensive testing when the dogs are all healthy.” Even more disastrous to the breed’s future is that these breeders’ attitudes begin to prevail. The newcomers see the success of these breeders’ dogs and buy them (even though few, if any, have had even the most rudimentary testing for structural faults, poor health or defective genes). The newcomers then have a financial and emotional investment to protect which begins to spread this attitude, with predictable results. Soon, because these breeders are the “powers” within the breed (quite often judges, people selected to discuss the breed at seminars, breeders who command respective prices for puppies and stud fees, breeders seen winning), they use this “power” to ensure that it becomes unethical to discuss any defects, in either health or temperament, found in any of the pedigrees of their sires, dams or progeny of their sires or dams. All too often one hears “I don’t dare say anything if I want to win” or “there are three lines with epilepsy (or heart or eye or pick a health problem), but you don’t need to know about them.” Of course we need to know about them, how else are we to make intelligent decisions about which dogs would best benefit the future we plan for our dogs unless we consider not only the structural beauty, but also the hidden genetics that we are attempting to also improve?
What about the breeders who openly discuss the defects found in their own dogs? Unfortunately, they are all too often labelled as “poor breeders” and their dogs said to be “defective”. They are shunned and spoken of in whispers and sneers. The very fact that these breeders are striving to share knowledge openly and to scientifically test their dogs make these breeders the subject of witch hunts by the very people who are either too cheap, too unconcerned, too egotistical, too uncaring about the future to even test their dogs, much less have the courage to honestly discuss their dogs. Instead of applauding these breeders who choose to share information, these breeders become shunned and hounded. As a result, and because human nature makes us want to be part of a group instead of outside the group, breeders begin to do what they do best – they maintain silence and lie or refuse to admit what they do know.


As more and more newcomers join a breed and inexperienced breeders and exhibitors all jump on the bandwagon of showing, owning and practicing the art of breeding, they turn to the breeders who are winning, equating winning with superior quality dogs. The breeders are, therefore, more determined to have nothing bad revealed about any of their dogs, further establishing in their minds the perfection of the dogs they breed and further increasing the financial and emotional investment that they have in perpetuating this theory. Winning in the show ring has nothing to do with genetic health. Indeed, a number of the winning dogs are carriers of genetic disorders at the least and, in some instances, are known to have genetic health disorders. While a genetic disorder itself, depending upon type and severity, should never preclude the dog from the genetic pool, it is absolutely mandatory that people be aware of any area of concern in order to breed intelligently. At the very least, the dogs that the dog is bred to must be tested and their backgrounds looked at carefully to limit the possibility of affecting more dogs or making more dogs carriers of the disorder. Yet, because the winners don’t want to be labelled as “poor breeders” and lose the accolade of being the best (as well as the possible financial loss in not being able to sell puppies or stud fees at as high a price), the “Code of Silence” becomes even more firmly embraced.


The newcomers, because they want to be accepted, avoid talking about the sires and dams that produce poorly, whether it is structure, health or temperament problems. Also, they too now have a financial and emotional investment in addition to wanting to be accepted into the “winners club.” They may even recognize trends in one or more lines in their own pedigrees, but refuse to acknowledge these trends and keep them secret for fear of being labelled.


Often, the breeders, while not openly acknowledging that there are any problems, will attempt to dilute the possibility of the disorder rearing its head by out-breeding to another totally different line. Dr. Jerold Bell, a well-known geneticist, has this to say about this method: “Repeated out-breeding to attempt to dilute detrimental recessive genes is not a desirable method of genetic disease control. Recessive genes cannot be diluted; they are either present or not. Out-breeding carriers multiples and further spreads the defective gene(s) in the gene pool. If a dog is a known carrier or has high carrier risk through pedigree analysis, it can be retired from breeding, and replaced with one or two quality offspring. Those offspring should be bred, and replaced with quality offspring of their own, with the hope of losing the defective gene.”


Unfortunately, refusing to acknowledge or test for genetic disorders doesn’t make them go away. What we can’t see still has a huge impact on the breed and continuing to breed these carriers of defective genes allows the defect to take a firmer hold in the breed. Those breeders who try very hard to breed healthy dogs and take every scientific precaution to ensure genetic health are shunned for the very passion that should be applauded; the efforts they take are trivialized at best and more often ridiculed as “unnecessary” or “fear-mongering.” As a result, these breeders work alone and, outside of their own kennel, their efforts make little impact on the breed as a whole.


Omerta can only be broken by people who have the courage, conviction and passion to ensure that the breed as a whole becomes stronger and healthier. Instead of witch hunts for those who have the heartache of dealing with the problems, the goal of applauding those with the courage and determination to speak out openly should be taken up by every breed club in every country. Awards in addition to those given to breeders who have the most winning dogs should be given to those breeders who work tirelessly to improve the breed. Prettiness and beauty doesn’t improve a breed; genetic health and the ability to live a pain-free, healthy life far surpass beauty, but are more difficult to obtain.


The cost of genetic testing is not high when one looks at the effects that refusing to test may have on the breed. Ask any knowledgeable breeder whose breed has rampant heart, blood disorder, eye or hip problems whether they blame the lack of foresight and the refusal of past breeders in making a further financial investment in the breed for the almost insurmountable problems now and the answer is predictable. In the UK, it is possible to do testing by certified specialists for hip, elbow, eye, heart, blood, immune disorders for around a total investment of £295.00 (far less in the United States), less than a cost of a puppy or a stud fee. It’s possible to do far less testing, but at what cost? Will the breed suffer from heart problems in the future because a simple £7.50 stethoscope test (done through one of the breed-sponsored heart clinics, in this case the Boxer) was not important at the time? Will the breed be faced with trying to eradicate blindness years from now because a £16.00 eye exam (done through one of the many eye clinics held each month or free if done at Crufts dog show at the clinic they hold each year) was thought unwarranted? Will the descendants be filled with pain from bad hips and/or elbows because the breed moved well in the show ring and didn’t look dysplastic to the naked eye? (X-rays necessary for hip and elbow evaluations are the most expensive testing at a cost of approximately £110 for hips and an additional £80 for elbows when done with the hips; unfortunately it takes six different films to evaluate elbows and the cost reflects the number of films necessary.) Testing for things such as von Willebrand’s Disease (vWD) and thyroid testing (immune system) can be done inexpensively as blood tests at perhaps £30 and £50 each. Granted, testing for these genetic disorders won’t guarantee that a problem won’t occur in future breedings, but testing will greatly reduce the chances of problems and that is a good place to start.
If a breeder cannot provide proof in the form of veterinarian-issued certificates or reports that genetic testing has been done, the buyer should be aware that they purchase at their own risk! Caveat emptor! Breeders may claim that their dogs have never limped or that there is no need to do any testing because the breed is healthy. Some may even claim that their veterinarians have said that genetic testing was unnecessary. Those stances are irresponsible. Once again, genes are not visible and carriers of defective genes may themselves appear healthy to the naked eye. It is only with testing that we really know whether our dogs are affected or not and only then with honest evaluation of pedigrees having tested or affected dogs that the potentiality for carriers are realized.


What can we do to break the deadly Code of Silence? The majority, if not all, breed clubs have a code of ethics that require members to breed healthy dogs. One of the places to start is with the clubs. Instead of being social institutions or “good ole boy” clubs, these breed organizations could begin upholding the very real goal of protecting the future of the breed by demanding and requiring that genetic testing be undertaken prior to breeding. Far more serious than breeding a sixteen-month old bitch is the practice of breeding without taking every possible safeguard that genetic health is a priority. Yet, in many clubs “poor breeders” are identified by the age at which they breed or the frequency in which they breed rather than the very real criteria that proof of health be mandatory. Take the emphasis off winning – how many clubs determine “breeder of the year” based on the number of progeny that wins? Are there clubs that actually require that the breeder also must show proof that they are doing all they can do to ensure the future of the breed?


We can break the silence by commending those with the courage and determination to talk about problems, share successes and knowledge instead of ostracizing them. Omerta fails if every puppy buyer and stud dog user demands that proof of genetic testing is shown. The Code of Silence fails when we realize that it is not enough to breed winning dogs or to command the highest price for puppies or to have a stud dog that is used fifty, sixty, a hundred times; we must take back the passion with which we all first embraced our breeds and passionately work with determination toward a future where the numbers of genetic disorders are reduced each year.


If those you know breed without testing, ask yourself why – is it lack of courage in perhaps finding a carrier within their breeding stock? Is it because they fear a financial loss if they test? Is it because they truly believe that their dogs couldn’t possibly be less than perfect? Is it because they fear they will lose their “top breeder” standing if they admit that there are problems that need working on? Is it because they fear that it will be harder to breed beautiful and healthy dogs? Or have they lost the passion with which they first loved the breed while they were climbing the road to winning success? Or, more sadly, is it because they really just don’t care about that which they cannot actually see?


It’s hard work and takes great courage to develop a breeding program using scientific methods and tests, but the hope of a better future should drive us all to that very commitment. The key is being able to work together without fear of whispers or silence. Omerta, the code of silence, can be broken if more of us decide that we are not going to tolerate the quiet any longer.

[tiffinis]

I am only going to touch on one part of this topic. Because my "other" breed is Labs and have had them WAY longer then beagles. Yes most responsible breeders do get, at the minimum, hips certified. My chocolate lab came from awesome lines with direct links to foundation sires. His father was international field trial champion from Europe. His OFA rating is Excellent. His mother's OFA rating was Good. I waited responsibly until he was 24 months old and had him sedated and x-rayed for OFA testing, $135.00 vet bill and an additional OFA bill. Only to have them tell me he failed and that he had displasia. I was devastated. Upon getting additional opinions at additional fees, I found out that his was not displasia, but human error of a fraction of an inch. Further testing PennHip tests proved him sound. OFA x-rays are done by hand and can be deliberately or accidentally screwed. Also have heard of the same x-rays getting different evaluations by the people at OFA. I will never again have OFA done. PennHip is much more accurate. Do your homework. http://www.pennhip.org/

[Keystone Kid]

I feel a plug coming to breed to a "National Champion". LMAO!

No plug needed. It just takes a little common sense.

To many people that own and raise beagles are ignorant, immoral, and very deceitful in their dealings. If they weren’t, they would make some type of guaranty when they sell a high quality hound for a fair price.

[Ronnyg]

I feel a plug coming to breed to a "National Champion". LMAO!

No plug needed. It just takes a little common sense.

To many people that own and raise beagles are ignorant, immoral, and very deceitful in their dealings. If they weren’t, they would make some type of guaranty when they sell a high quality hound for a fair price.

What is your idea of moral? I saw an add of yours that you were selling a female pup that had an obvious hernia in the picture you had posted. When one of the ladies on here pointed it out to you, you removed that specific picture that showed it and left the add on here. Would that not be considered deceitful?? Additionally I saw an add you had that your were selling a female that you stated was not old enough to have a "full season of hunting" yet you offered to breed her to your "National Champion" male and deliver her to the Silver Creek Picnic. Most respected breeders would NEVER breed an unproven female. These are just a couple of examples in the short time I have been coming to these boards. Yet now you wanna question the moral stance and ignorance of others???? Might wanna do a little practicing before you start the preaching. JMO

[Joeyman]

I feel a plug coming to breed to a "National Champion". LMAO!

No plug needed. It just takes a little common sense.

To many people that own and raise beagles are ignorant, immoral, and very deceitful in their dealings. If they weren’t, they would make some type of guaranty when they sell a high quality hound for a fair price.

What is your idea of moral? I saw an add of yours that you were selling a female pup that had an obvious hernia in the picture you had posted. When one of the ladies on here pointed it out to you, you removed that specific picture that showed it and left the add on here. Would that not be considered deceitful?? Additionally I saw an add you had that your were selling a female that you stated was not old enough to have a "full season of hunting" yet you offered to breed her to your "National Champion" male and deliver her to the Silver Creek Picnic. Most respected breeders would NEVER breed an unproven female. These are just a couple of examples in the short time I have been coming to these boards. Yet now you wanna question the moral stance and ignorance of others???? Might wanna do a little practicing before you start the preaching. JMO

This is getting good

[DIXIEDOG]

I am only going to touch on one part of this topic. Because my "other" breed is Labs and have had them WAY longer then beagles. Yes most responsible breeders do get, at the minimum, hips certified. My chocolate lab came from awesome lines with direct links to foundation sires. His father was international field trial champion from Europe. His OFA rating is Excellent. His mother's OFA rating was Good. I waited responsibly until he was 24 months old and had him sedated and x-rayed for OFA testing, $135.00 vet bill and an additional OFA bill. Only to have them tell me he failed and that he had displasia. I was devastated. Upon getting additional opinions at additional fees, I found out that his was not displasia, but human error of a fraction of an inch. Further testing PennHip tests proved him sound. OFA x-rays are done by hand and can be deliberately or accidentally screwed. Also have heard of the same x-rays getting different evaluations by the people at OFA. I will never again have OFA done. PennHip is much more accurate. Do your homework. http://www.pennhip.org/

This sounds too familiar, I had my 2 yr old bitch checked out before I would breed her, vet said he needed to Xray the hips to be sure she doesn't have any displaysia or other deformities. After Xrays the vet charges $190 and tells me it looks like she has displaysia, there goes the breeding for this bitch, he then suggests that I have him send the Xrays to a specialist for a 2nd opinion. More $$$ then the specialist says she looks fine and her hips were better than most beagles that he had seen, of course by the time I got that info her cycle had come and gone, hopefully nothing happens before her next cycle and I can breed her.