Page 23 of 24 FirstFirst ... 1321222324 LastLast
Results 221 to 230 of 238

Thread: The Ups & Downs Of Getting a Pup

  1. #221
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    745

    Default

    Rather than edit I'll add another post.

    Unilateral deaf dogs (deaf in one ear) were not able to be detected until the introduction of the BAER testing.

    Due to dogs good hearing one ear was good enough to get thru the old testing system.

    As you can imagine BAER testing took a while to be available to dogs.

    I think I have posted that before but couldn't be bothered going back to check.

  2. #222
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    2,388

    Default

    LOl yea I wasnt meaning youve edited it out of your posts.

    Probably what I should have said was "I thought MAC said it originally and some of the posts have been edited but that doesnt mean they did"

    My wording is sometimes a bit crud coz I just type as it comes into mind.

    LOL at fixing typos....I dont bother...too lazy. I use a 10incher too (my kids) and they can be annoying

  3. #223

    Default

    Just thought I would pop back in after chatting to a friend who used to breed dallies... They have never had a black born deaf, but they have had 3 liver pups that have been deaf... just thought that was interesting as color seemed to play a big part with their litters.

  4. #224

    Default

    Just in regards to the 30 percent , I thought it was actualy Ange that mentioned it when adding up the numbers from the current amount of litters on DOL.
    GageDesign Pet Photography
    Site still in construction so will post link when it's finished.

  5. #225

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChoppaChop View Post
    Just in regards to the 30 percent , I thought it was actualy Ange that mentioned it when adding up the numbers from the current amount of litters on DOL.
    I didn't give a percentage with my theoretical example at all.

  6. #226
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    228

    Default

    I have no idea where it came from, but it was there? Or Im finally going crazy

  7. #227

    Default

    No I realised that Ange when I went back and checked

    And Lex I must be going mad too because it was there,somewhere
    GageDesign Pet Photography
    Site still in construction so will post link when it's finished.

  8. #228
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    4,292

    Default

    Sorry, didn't check back for a bit. I will just admit that I am in fact totally mad. And I have no idea where that initial 30% came from apart from it being a figure that is mentioned quite a bit on the interweb. I apologise for putting porkies up there!

    Let's go with the 12% figure, which is a lot less, but the principle of insisting on keeping current breeding lines "intact" still doesn't seem right if a deviation from the standard could fix the issue.

  9. #229

    Default

    That deviation has already happened in one country. I signed a petition for it. They used a pedigreed pointer for it.

    Yes some disagree with it, we've already said that that train of thought is a bad thing. The breed should not be decimated because a minority group kicked up a stink and were completely elitist about it!

  10. #230
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    12,602

    Default

    So now this is really an argument about having breed standards and show judges selecting beautiful dogs that may be "defective" in other significant ways. Ie choosling against a visual standard over a healthy standard.

    Personally, I'm in favour of the occasional out crossing. But I'm not a purebred fanatic. I do like the idea that there is a dog for every purpose and look and temperment, but I kind of liked it better when the selection was a more natural process.

    And now we have DNA testing - people who have made sneaky outcrosses ie puppies are not the offspring of the reported parents - the whole genetic pool for each breed could be come even more restricted.

    That's the trouble with the way genes work
    - if you breed for pure lines - you end up with a tiny gene pool that is not very adaptable.
    - if you don't breed selectively - you end up with a huge gene pool and as many problems as good qualities.
    - and every now and again there is a natural mutation eg caused by radiation (eg sunlight) or virus (how they do gene splicing now) or other causes. If there wasn't we'd all still be amoeba.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •