> I think it is a shame to be in such a race to breed that we would rather
risk
> passing on bad genes then risk losing a dog from our breeding program.
> as I would rather lose ONE dog from the program then possibly pass along
> genetic issues to MORE THEN ONE dog and raise the potential of it
> geometrically mushrooming from there.

I don't think like this at all.  I think that if we were able to lay out the
genetic code of every Cavalier and were able to assign a number to each and
every good and bad trait contained in that code (positive numbers to the
good ones and negative numbers to the bad ones), we would find that the VAST
majority of Cavaliers end up with a similar number.  I think nearly all
Cavaliers will have some good things to contribute to a breeding program and
some bad as well.  Since we can't figure out the genetic code--yet--the
trick is to fully test ALL of our dogs so that we can figure out which lines
have what to contribute and know the direction in which to go to get the
best results.  This way we can balance out the faults and virtues so the
majority of our dogs are decently healthy and still preserve genetic
diversity so we can preserve immune system function.  But since the majority
do not fully test--we are pretty much breeding in the dark--doing a lot of
guessing.  So the only thing we can do at this point in time is to breed
dogs who test clear if we want to avoid negatively impacting our breeding
programs.

 Any of you know a particular name or
> two of any widely used dog that turned out to pass on bad stuff?
 Would you
> have liked to have seen that dog NOT used?  Would it have made any
difference?

More than likely every stud dog ever used passed on some bad stuff--and some
good stuff too!

> I totally disagree.  Lets start by doing what everyone says they are
already
> doing but making it confirmed through documentation and public.  To
register
> a litter you have to produce all medical test results done on the parents.
> These will be published in a public forum.  If you don't have them, didn't
do
> some of them, the publication notes, not provided.  Everyone can breed to
> what they want.  Nobody is denied registration privileges.  BUT the
general
> public can see what was done and what wasn't.  Information is provided to
> help people make decisions on.  And you can bet that the natural tendency
> would be for the buying public to first seek those who provide good test
> results.  And the breeders will follow.  And you STILL can make that
decision
> when looking at the whole picture to breed to that girl or boy with the
> wonderful heart who is slightly dysplastic because everything else is
great
> and you feel the risk is minor and overall it will produce better
offspring.
> But everyone will know you did it.  If it was the right thing to do this
> should not be a concern.  I would rather see it mandatory to test to
register
> but I am very comfortable with first just making what is and is not done
> public.  This would be a MAJOR milestone for the breed.  Anyone who runs
from
> that level of requirement in my opinion can't be acting in a way
beneficial
> for the breed.  Everyone should be willing to stand by what they are doing
if
> they believe in it.  The runners would be the ones who KNOW what they are
> doing is wrong.

Great idea!  Not only would they know, but breeders would also soon find out
that most dogs are pretty even genetically.  That Cavaliers who are cleared
for eyes, hearts, hips and patellas are not all that genetically superior to
other Cavaliers as once thought.

Laura Lang

=========================================================
"Magic Commands":
to stop receiving mail for awhile, click here and send the email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=SET%20CKCS-L%20NOMAIL
to start it up gain click here:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=SET%20CKCS-L%20MAIL

 E-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] for assistance.
Search the Archives... http://apple.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ckcs-l.html

All e-mail sent through CKCS-L is Copyright 2002 by its original author.

Reply via email to