# Labmaraner??



## romandog (Sep 8, 2009)

Unfortunately this afternoon a beautiful weimaraner dog has (most likely)fertilised our Labrador bitch (23 months old)!

We were saving her to breed with another Lab but does anyone know of Labmaraner mixed breed? Its a new one on me, but I have a feeling it could make nice pups - she is black and he is silver.

Is there anyone who knows about this paring. If she is preg it will be my first attempt at breeding so any advice would be most appreciated.
Thanks
Louise


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Personally, I'd get her booked in for the misalignment jabs. There is no need to put your girl through having a litter, leave it until you've got all the health test results, done all your research and you will still be biting your nails when you come to breed from her.


----------



## sequeena (Apr 30, 2009)

I'm sure I've heard of that cross before. I think it was mentioned on here a few days ago.

If she is pregnant will you be keeping the pups although you wanted to breed her with another lab?

Good luck, I hope you get good advice from people with more experience than me 

Personally I feel dogs should not be bred simply for how pretty their pups will be. Like Sleeping_Lion said I would get the mismate jab then breed when you're ready x


----------



## bucksmum (Jul 19, 2009)

I agree with Sleeping Lion.
Get the jab and spend a few months looking for a suitable stud and looking into health tests.
Good luck.


----------



## RAINYBOW (Aug 27, 2009)

Same here, if this was unplanned then the mismate would be the ideal solution.


----------



## lady_r0gue (Jul 22, 2009)

Personally I think they'd make beautiful intelligent healthy puppies, but I am a huge fan of mongrels and mixes; my dog's a Newfanieltriever!  What you call the litter he fathered with an Alsatian/1/4 Timberwolf I don't know... but they are GORGEOUS . I guess it might be harder to get top money for the pups but it wouldn't be a personal concern of mine. I guess I'd say (sadly) that the morning-after pill is the way if your heart is set on her breeding pure labs though...


----------



## majortom (May 7, 2009)

romandog said:


> Unfortunately this afternoon a beautiful weimaraner dog has (most likely)fertilised our Labrador bitch (23 months old)!
> 
> We were saving her to breed with another Lab but does anyone know of Labmaraner mixed breed? Its a new one on me, but I have a feeling it could make nice pups - she is black and he is silver.
> 
> ...


i just give up
why are you breeding two differant breeds together
what is your aim
what about health checks etc
have you homes lined up
what will you do if she has 10./12 pups
can you keep them till all have good homes
can you take back any pups returned to you, even after a couple of years .
what if she need vet care, 
bills can add up to over £1000 if she needs a ceasarian
take a look at some puppy selling internet sites and see how many puppies are for sale
thousands
can you keep them all if you do not sell them 
i would take her for a mis mate jab
then research breeding properly
there is more to it than putting 2 dogs together to get cute pretty pups


----------



## Guest (Sep 8, 2009)

majortom said:


> i just give up
> why are you breeding two differant breeds together
> what is your aim
> what about health checks etc
> ...


Ill back you up on this - well said


----------



## Luvdogs (Aug 15, 2008)

I have to agree with Sleeping Lion

Good luck


----------



## crazycrest (Feb 13, 2008)

Sorry OP, have to agree with sleeping lion, majortom, oblada & luv dogs!
It would be much better for all concerned if you booked your bitch in for a mismate injection & much cheaper in the long run too!


----------



## Taylorbaby (Jan 10, 2009)

Ive seen this mix and they were just all black dogs.
didnt look like any breed just a cross


----------



## Nicky09 (Feb 26, 2009)

Ok the best option would be the mismate jab and it would be very easy at this point. I take it this was accident? 
If you do continue to go ahead are you willing to put in the time raising puppies is no easy thing especially if the mother rejects them. Will you be prepared to sit all day and night with them for the first week or so, bottle feed them and help them toilet if need be every couple of hours?
Not to mention the cost vet care for the bitch, £1000 for the c-section should something go wrong with the birth and that can happen with any breed, puppy milk if need be, vet checks, worming and all necessary puppy care. Not to mention taking the puppies back if the new owners can't take care of them and I think there can be up to 10+ puppies in these litters. Not to mention the lost wages from having to stay with said puppies for the first couple of weeks. 
If you can do all this then go ahead but personally I would recommend the mismate


----------



## Cat_Crazy (Jul 15, 2009)

I would also get to the vet for a mismate jab.

How did this dog manage to get near your female??

If you know she is in season and are hoping to breed her with a lab then surely you would not allow her to be near any male un-supervised?


----------



## Molly's Mum (May 22, 2009)

I agree with the other posts, if you care for your girl and wish to breed responibily in the future your first port of call should be the vets to get her the mis-mate jab asap.


----------



## majortom (May 7, 2009)

Cat_Crazy said:


> I would also get to the vet for a mismate jab.
> 
> How did this dog manage to get near your female??
> 
> If you know she is in season and are hoping to breed her with a lab then surely you would not allow her to be near any male un-supervised?


when ever any of my girls where in season,
they never went out
except the garden with me there
and i had at one time 5 males and 2 bitches of a large gundog breed
males and females seperated for 4 weeks


----------



## Nicky09 (Feb 26, 2009)

To be fair accidents do happen even with experienced breeders and its happened now so forget that


----------



## Guest (Sep 8, 2009)

Can only echo what others before me have already suggested, go for the mismate.


----------



## hobo99 (Aug 18, 2008)

I agree that a mismate jab would be the best option , . 
It is far better to consider if you really want to breed with your bitch, and then have all the health tests done , rather than go to all the expensive of breeding an unintentional crossbreed, that in this day and age might not sell , what would you do with them then .
Good luck with what ever you decide . su


----------



## champagneannie (Jan 15, 2009)

majortom said:


> i just give up
> why are you breeding two differant breeds together
> what is your aim
> what about health checks etc
> ...


sorry but i think it was not a planned mating...


----------



## majortom (May 7, 2009)

Nicky09 said:


> To be fair accidents do happen even with experienced breeders and its happened now so forget that


i agree
i was extra carefull around the girls season times


----------



## sequeena (Apr 30, 2009)

Yeah I have to agree I think (huge give away with the Unfortunately at the beginning  ) that this was an accident. Accidents happen x


----------



## Guest (Sep 8, 2009)

champagneannie said:


> sorry but i think it was not a planned mating...


True but those are the questions and concerns relevant when deciding to go ahead with a pregnancy or to mismate - at this stage if one decides to go ahear it becomes very similar to a planned mating to be honest.

xx


----------



## Guest (Sep 8, 2009)

Cat_Crazy said:


> How did this dog manage to get near your female??
> 
> If you know she is in season and are hoping to breed her with a lab then surely you would not allow her to be near any male un-supervised?


These are two big dogs we are talking of, you may be suprised to learn that a mating can actually take place through a closed crate side, think sometimes we have to take the word of the member and believe that every precaution had been taken and unfortuanately an accidental mating did take place.
It can and does happen to the best of em.


----------



## majortom (May 7, 2009)

champagneannie said:


> sorry but i think it was not a planned mating...


no ,maybe it was not planned
but person still said he was going to breed bitch 
so i said what i always say to people who ask
and if it was not planned,
maybe keep a tighter rein on a in season bitch would be the thing to do
like keep in garden on its own
not let a male near it for at least 4 weeks


----------



## majortom (May 7, 2009)

Smarty Pants said:


> These are two big dogs we are talking of, you may be suprised to learn that a mating can actually take place through a closed crate side, think sometimes we have to take the word of the member and believe that every precaution had been taken and unfortuanately an accidental mating did take place.
> It can and does happen to the best of em.


i know someone whose gorden setter jumped thro a patio door to get to their girl,lol
they got to her first


----------



## ninja (Jan 4, 2009)

i think is yet another wind up thread ,

the op signed off as soon as they posted it ut:


----------



## Jo P (Dec 10, 2007)

Dont feed the trolls


----------



## canuckjill (Jun 25, 2008)

I agree with JoP its weird that someone was just on here looking for that cross....Jill


----------



## lizzie (Apr 13, 2008)

Perhaps it's time to close this thread - Advice has been given.


----------



## petforum (Oct 30, 2007)

Ive took note of their IP address so if they are a troll, and come back on under a different name, I can name and shame them


----------



## Guest (Sep 8, 2009)

petforum said:


> Ive took note of their IP address so if they are a troll, and come back on under a different name, I can name and shame them


Not exactly sure what a troll is, when I was a child they were ugly little dolls with long garish hair. But I do think that it is strange that there was a thread yesterday regarding a potential mating of a lab and a weim, could it be possible that these two members are one and the same. Could you not check both of their IP addresses? Maying they are testing the market.


----------



## Dingle (Aug 29, 2008)

majortom said:


> i just give up
> why are you breeding two differant breeds together
> what is your aim
> what about health checks etc
> ...


Excellent & thank you for this post 

Trolls or not... i bet some mug would pay a fortune for this designer cross...ut:

lmfao...


----------



## Guest (Sep 8, 2009)

Dingle said:


> Excellent & thank you for this post
> 
> Trolls or not... i bet some mug would pay a fortune for this designer cross...ut:
> 
> lmfao...


Unfortunately yes they would, but there would be no guarantee of an unusual colour and the breeder could just as easily end up with a very ordinary looking black dog. Again I echo those that have posted prior to me, the missmate would be the route to take imo.


----------



## Dingle (Aug 29, 2008)

Smarty Pants said:


> Unfortunately yes they would, but there would be no guarantee of an unusual colour and the breeder could just as easily end up with a very ordinary looking black dog. Again I echo those that have posted prior to me, the missmate would be the route to take imo.


And i agree with you, but... you can only lead a horse to water...


----------



## romandog (Sep 8, 2009)

Just like to clear up... I am not a troll. I dont have multicolour sticky up hair!

Its my first time on here as I wanted advice, but quite dissapointed in some of your reactions to my posting.

Firstly bitch was in question was in the back garden. Its got a fence she cannot jump it. I was cooking for my children whilst keeping an eye out of the window. My son (4 half year old) was sitting up to the table and rocked his chair on two legs so it fell back and he spilt his head open. During this time the chip pan was on and my 12 year old was screaming that there was a dog in the garden. I took my son up to his father, who in turn took him to A&E. I turned off the chips and went to separate the dogs. By this time he was locked on to her. IS THAT ACCIDENT ENOUGH FOR YOU??

Way to go to turn people off your forum..


----------



## Jo P (Dec 10, 2007)

Perhaps a visit to the vets might be in order - did you not think of that instead of making up a silly name for a mongrel??


----------



## Guest (Sep 8, 2009)

Jo P said:


> Perhaps a visit to the vets might be in order - did you not think of that instead of making up a silly name for a mongrel??


The name is no sillier then many I have seem splattered around this forum, The OP has explained the situation maybe a little more compassion and a little less sarcasm would be the way to go.


----------



## lauren001 (Jun 30, 2008)

This is a big forum with new members turning up daily plus our fair share of trolls who take great glee in winding everyone up.
New members especially those who ask questions regarding "iffy" topics are viewed with suspicion, so do not take it to heart.
Personally I agree with most on here, though that you should visit the vet and get this "pregnancy" stopped.
You will end up with a load of black puppies, you do not know how healthy or otherwise the father was, so you may be storing up a whole load of trouble for yourself and the puppies not yet born. Although looking healthy that dog may pass on some defect to the pups. Better to breed with animals you know the history of.
If you do want to breed in the future, you do not want your bitch potentially ruined for the sake of this accidental mating.

JMO


----------



## Guest (Sep 8, 2009)

I agree accidents happened - now its done.
The responsible way forward as most have advocated would be mismate.
Th weimanarer is a pretty big dog isnt it? Just that could mean that the bitch could be in serious danger if she was left to carry the pups (and I know that from - bad - experience!)...


----------



## Colsy (Oct 3, 2008)

Like to add really it does not matter what you call the name etc.
We are talking about a dog at the end of the day.
So please respect this thank you.


----------



## romandog (Sep 8, 2009)

Jo P said:


> Perhaps a visit to the vets might be in order - did you not think of that instead of making up a silly name for a mongrel??


Didnt make up the name I googled and it came up her before me I just assumed it was some sort of hybrid a la labradoodle.

U guys are quite militant arent you??


----------



## Guest (Sep 8, 2009)

Oblada said:


> I agree accidents happened - now its done.
> The responsible way forward as most have advocated would be mismate.
> Th weimanarer is a pretty big dog isnt it? Just that could mean that the bitch could be in serious danger if she was left to carry the pups (and I know that from - bad - experience!)...


The weimaraner and the lab are quite evenly matched weight wise as it happens, the lab having a broarder head then the weimaraner and appearing to be stockier in build, this would be conteracted by the weimarners height. 
I am as it happens against any form of mixed breeding and agree with your post whole heartedly.


----------



## Molly's Mum (May 22, 2009)

romandog said:


> Didnt make up the name I googled and it came up her before me I just assumed it was some sort of hybrid a la labradoodle.
> 
> U guys are quite militant arent you??


I am sorry this has happened to you...... You have asked for some advice from experienced breeders and everyone has given you the same advice, you need to get you dog to vets for the mis-mate injection.

This would be the responsible thing to do for your girl. Also giving you the time to do the required health checks on your girl, research, find a suitable stud dog if you still wish to breed in the future.


----------



## Fleur (Jul 19, 2008)

I own a couple of cross breeds and I adore them - However if I was planning to breed I would mismate an unplanned pregnancy, especially if you don't know anything about the Dog.
You'll have no ideas if the dog has any health problems, also I would want to complete all relevant health tests on my bitch and mate her with a suitable well matched,health tested dog, be that to pure or cross breed.

Sounds like it was a pretty horrible day, I hope your little one is all OK

(PS, Before any one misunderstands me, my dogs are all neutered because I don't plan to breed mine)


----------



## Guest (Sep 8, 2009)

Let me be the first to welcome you to the forum Roman Dog, Perhaps it would be an idea to post a thread in the indroduction area of this forum and make a fresh start, I am not making excuses for myself of anything that others have said but cross breeding is a subject that many members have strong feelings about.
Again I say welcome.


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

I would definately get the mismate.

If you were planning on breeding her with another Lab, then you will have to wait a fair while to do so if you go ahead with this litter. 

If she were mine i do would the right thing and get her the mismate this time, and then have her health tested and cleared and then set about finding a superb stud dog who had the same tests done. Also you can have a great waiting list of forever homes wanting Labs. Then your litter of pups will have a great start in life and your conscious will be clear! 

After all it is you choosing to bring these pups into this world.


----------



## brackensmom (Jun 15, 2009)

Smarty Pants said:


> Let me be the first to welcome you to the forum Roman Dog, Perhaps it would be an idea to post a thread in the indroduction area of this forum and make a fresh start, I am not making excuses for myself of anything that others have said but cross breeding is a subject that many members have strong feelings about.
> Again I say welcome.


Well said SP, and may i also welcome you, sorry that you have not been made very welcome, we are a friendly lot really LOL.


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

romandog said:


> Didnt make up the name I googled and it came up her before me I just assumed it was some sort of hybrid a la labradoodle.
> 
> U guys are quite militant arent you??


Not militant. Just extremely passionate about ethical dog breeding.

I understand accidents happen. And it is no ones place to even think you planned it. But having said that if you too were passionate about ethical dog breeding then you would the best now and then plan your next bitch's pregnancy.


----------



## lizzie (Apr 13, 2008)

Whooops......


----------



## shortbackandsides (Aug 28, 2008)

I see no reason why your bitch couldnt go through with the pregnancy,if thats what you decide,the whole cross breed attitude here is getting a bit boring why should they be terminated just because they arent pedigree!! many people would rather have a xbreed anyday,there is no reason why they shouldnt all find good homes.Im sure they will be gorgeous!
just please dont advertise them as labmaraners!! weimareners x labrador will do!!


----------



## Guest (Sep 8, 2009)

shortbackandsides said:


> I see no reason why your bitch couldnt go through with the pregnancy,if thats what you decide,the whole cross breed attitude here is getting a bit boring why should they be terminated just because they arent pedigree!! many people would rather have a xbreed anyday,there is no reason why they shouldnt all find good homes.Im sure they will be gorgeous!


Not at all - noone said the pregnancy should be terminated on the basis that they are cross;
The reason why mismate sounds a better idea is simplye because:
- OP planned for pure breeding in the future - so a good well researched stud to match the bitch
- this was an accident
- no home lined up - risks of pups ending up in rescue in the current climate
- no history on the male - no health check - no knowledge of temperament etc
- i am assuming no health check yet of the bitch
- responsibility of breeder to give life back up for pups - heavy burden
So it could end up being a very expensive and very dangerous accident.
Crosses are fine by me (to be honest only as long as it does not touch the breeds I am most fond of lol I admit that) as long as it is done safely and responsibly; which means health checks and homes lined up (and preferrably a reason to breed...)

Lets not get into a cross debate - I believe everyone would say mostly the same if the accident had happened with an unknown labrador.


----------



## romandog (Sep 8, 2009)

Thanks... I didnt realise it was such an emotive issue. I will get in touch with the vet tommorow to make sure she doesnt have the litter...not a fan of crossing breeds myself. I have always had labradors and only ever black ones and they are proven to be fab with the kids. 
I wasnt ready to breed her at this time just after some good quality advice which I have received so thanks everyone


----------



## Guest (Sep 8, 2009)

shortbackandsides said:


> I see no reason why your bitch couldnt go through with the pregnancy,if thats what you decide,the whole cross breed attitude here is getting a bit boring why should they be terminated just because they arent pedigree!! many people would rather have a xbreed anyday,there is no reason why they shouldnt all find good homes.Im sure they will be gorgeous!
> just please dont advertise them as labmaraners!! weimareners x labrador will do!!


The OP has suggested in here opening post that she is intending to breed her labrador, Maybe she is after a show bitch or there is another reason that they are wanting a litter, by continuing with this litter she is going to put her original breeding plan back by a year.


----------



## Guest (Sep 8, 2009)

romandog said:


> Thanks... I didnt realise it was such an emotive issue. I will get in touch with the vet tommorow to make sure she doesnt have the litter...not a fan of crossing breeds myself. I have always had labradors and only ever black ones and they are proven to be fab with the kids.
> I wasnt ready to breed her at this time just after some good quality advice which I have received so thanks everyone


Great decision, I for one hope that you stay around and give us a chance, please at the very least keep us up to date on the outcome of this unforunate event.
Hope that your sons head is on the mend also.
All the very best to you. It is very refreshing when people listen and take on board advise offered.


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

shortbackandsides said:


> I see no reason why your bitch couldnt go through with the pregnancy,if thats what you decide,the whole cross breed attitude here is getting a bit boring why should they be terminated just because they arent pedigree!! many people would rather have a xbreed anyday,there is no reason why they shouldnt all find good homes.Im sure they will be gorgeous!
> just please dont advertise them as labmaraners!! weimareners x labrador will do!!


I for one have absolutey nothing against crosses! A few people could tell you that. I don't get involved with the cross breed arguments on here. I actually found that a sweeping statement.

I do however belive in breeding for reasons and especially h/t. This bitch might not be health tested and cleared, nor the stud. That to me is reason NOT to have a litter of puppies.

The litter could well hold many many problems that could cause them a short life span or a painful one..................even both. At least with testing/clearing then the pups stand a chance of a very healthy long life.


----------



## crazycrest (Feb 13, 2008)

romandog said:


> Thanks... I didnt realise it was such an emotive issue. I will get in touch with the vet tommorow to make sure she doesnt have the litter...not a fan of crossing breeds myself. I have always had labradors and only ever black ones and they are proven to be fab with the kids.
> I wasnt ready to breed her at this time just after some good quality advice which I have received so thanks everyone


Hey Roman dog 
Well done for making the right decision!
I hope when you do get your girl tested that everything is great & you end up with a fantastic litter of labbies 
Best of luck!!!


----------



## Kinjilabs (Apr 15, 2009)

romandog said:


> Thanks... I didnt realise it was such an emotive issue. I will get in touch with the vet tommorow to make sure she doesnt have the litter...not a fan of crossing breeds myself. I have always had labradors and only ever black ones and they are proven to be fab with the kids.
> I wasnt ready to breed her at this time just after some good quality advice which I have received so thanks everyone


emotive issue!


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

romandog said:


> Thanks... I didnt realise it was such an emotive issue. I will get in touch with the vet tommorow to make sure she doesnt have the litter...not a fan of crossing breeds myself. I have always had labradors and only ever black ones and they are proven to be fab with the kids.
> I wasnt ready to breed her at this time just after some good quality advice which I have received so thanks everyone


Please stick around and join in on all sorts of animal subjects! I applaud you on your descion. I am not against crosses, i love all dogs no matter what breed or heinz 57, it was just the situation that your girl fell pregnant in.

I also love black Labs! I had one a male called Zulu. He was gorgeous and superb with my daughter who was born after he came.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

romandog said:


> Thanks... I didnt realise it was such an emotive issue. I will get in touch with the vet tommorow to make sure she doesnt have the litter...not a fan of crossing breeds myself. I have always had labradors and only ever black ones and they are proven to be fab with the kids.
> I wasnt ready to breed her at this time just after some good quality advice which I have received so thanks everyone


great decision Romandog


----------



## majortom (May 7, 2009)

Acacia86 said:


> I would definately get the mismate.
> 
> If you were planning on breeding her with another Lab, then you will have to wait a fair while to do so if you go ahead with this litter.
> 
> ...


tottally agree with you


----------



## majortom (May 7, 2009)

romandog said:


> Thanks... I didnt realise it was such an emotive issue. I will get in touch with the vet tommorow to make sure she doesnt have the litter...not a fan of crossing breeds myself. I have always had labradors and only ever black ones and they are proven to be fab with the kids.
> I wasnt ready to breed her at this time just after some good quality advice which I have received so thanks everyone


good on you
its nice to see someone listern to advice, so many bury their head in the sand.
i,m not against crossbreeds ,have had a couple of rescues myself
but intodays climate,its mad to breed any dog
unless there health tested and you have several homes ready for pups.
hope your son is ok


----------



## petforum (Oct 30, 2007)

Hi All,

Its good to see a nice outcome on a thread like this. All to often in the past, the thread poster gets bombarded with lots of negative posts which scares them off the forum, so we never actually get to find out what happens. Just goes to show, some positive words and excellent advice is best all round.

Welcome to the forum Louise, I hope you decide to stick around and contribute to the forum.


Mark


----------



## majortom (May 7, 2009)

shortbackandsides said:


> I see no reason why your bitch couldnt go through with the pregnancy,if thats what you decide,the whole cross breed attitude here is getting a bit boring why should they be terminated just because they arent pedigree!! many people would rather have a xbreed anyday,there is no reason why they shouldnt all find good homes.Im sure they will be gorgeous!
> just please dont advertise them as labmaraners!! weimareners x labrador will do!!


but its not just about the crossbreeding
its about the health of dog and bitch
and with no health testing
how do you know that the pups may have a problem in later life
its also about finding the right homes too
so many people are getting on this crossbreeding bandwagon
its frightening
have you seen how many pups are for sale on the internet
hundreds of thousands
visit a rescue centre and see the results
and yes its not just crossbreeds, its pedigrees too
my very first setter was a dog dumped at the rescue i worked for
just dumped at the gate,he came home with me after the 7 days were up.
have you ever held a dog for a vet to put to sleep cos nobody want him
i have, some even very young
quite a few infact.
try going to work and finding a couple of dogs,half starved tied up at your work place, or a pregnant bitch just dumped at the gates of the kennels
and this was years ago when i worked in rescue
today is even worse.
after seeing what i have seen
i will never be in favour of any crossbreeding, designer mutt breeding


----------



## crazycrest (Feb 13, 2008)

petforum said:


> Hi All,
> 
> Its good to see a nice outcome on a thread like this. All to often in the past, the thread poster gets bombarded with lots of negative posts which scares them off the forum, so we never actually get to find out what happens. Just goes to show, some positive words and excellent advice is best all round.
> 
> ...


I have to say I agree with what you're saying Mark 

But this is only because the OP has decided to do the right thing,
well imo anyway! It could so easily have gone the other way, go back to the middle of the thread & you'll see what I mean!
Some ya win some ya lose


----------



## petforum (Oct 30, 2007)

Yes, but it makes a refreshing change to see a thread like this not ending up in a major online brawl


----------



## crazycrest (Feb 13, 2008)

petforum said:


> Yes, but it makes a refreshing change to see a thread like this not ending up in a major online brawl


Very true...agreed


----------



## Guest (Sep 8, 2009)

majortom said:


> but its not just about the crossbreeding
> its about the health of dog and bitch
> and with no health testing
> how do you know that the pups may have a problem in later life
> ...


I cannot believe that you have just posted this thread. I have been writing an almost identical thread in word myself, Getting the words right has been difficult, I may still post it on a new thread in a few days.
But well said you. you have summed up the situation to a tee.


----------



## bucksmum (Jul 19, 2009)

I don't think you will regret having the mismate jab done.
You'll be able to have a litter in a years time and that will give you chance to have all health tests done (hips,eyes,elbows,optigen,cnm-god the list is endless,but neccessary).
Good luck with your breeding plans in the future


----------



## Dundee (Oct 20, 2008)

> I have to say I agree with what you're saying Mark
> 
> But this is only because the OP has decided to do the right thing,


Exactly.


----------



## Fleur (Jul 19, 2008)

Best of luck with your breeding plans -
I hope you stick around for a while and let us know how your girl is getting on, and if you decide to breed one day let us share the experience.
I'll never breed so I love having the opportunity to 'share' everyones experiences on line.  
Also please feel free to join in on all the chat and banter, we quite a friendly bunch really


----------



## majortom (May 7, 2009)

i,m glad someone else can agree,lol
maybe its only people who have worked in rescue can see the results of 
all this over breeding in todays climate
i,m not against breeding, i,ve had one litter myself
granted 12 years ago,tho,lol
but it needs to be done sensible and with thought
for the pups brought into this world


----------



## Guest (Sep 8, 2009)

crazycrest said:


> I have to say I agree with what you're saying Mark
> 
> But this is only because the OP has decided to do the right thing,
> well imo anyway! It could so easily have gone the other way, go back to the middle of the thread & you'll see what I mean!
> Some ya win some ya lose


Precisely, and it was noted that there was suspision that the post was a 'plant' at one stage of the thread, and if admin are unable to distinguish a hypothecal post from a genuine one how are us members able to. This emphasizes the importance on taking every post of this nature to be genuine, just in case, as this time it turned out to be.

Again I congratulate the original poster on making what many will see as the right decision.


----------



## Guest (Sep 8, 2009)

majortom said:


> i,m glad someone else can agree,lol
> maybe its only people who have worked in rescue can see the results of
> all this over breeding in todays climate
> i,m not against breeding, i,ve had one litter myself
> ...


And any offsping that the litter are likely to produce during their lifespan, and this can be several hundred .


----------



## Kinjilabs (Apr 15, 2009)

majortom said:


> i,m glad someone else can agree,lol
> maybe its only people who have worked in rescue can see the results of
> all this over breeding in todays climate
> i,m not against breeding, i,ve had one litter myself
> ...


Well said!


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

petforum said:


> Hi All,
> 
> Its good to see a nice outcome on a thread like this. All to often in the past, the thread poster gets bombarded with lots of negative posts which scares them off the forum, so we never actually get to find out what happens. Just goes to show, some positive words and excellent advice is best all round.
> 
> ...


I agree! This is what makes a forum. Especially this one. Healthy and positive conversation and advise.


----------



## Guest (Sep 9, 2009)

Everyone said what i would have!



romandog said:


> Thanks... I didnt realise it was such an emotive issue. I will get in touch with the vet tommorow to make sure she doesnt have the litter...not a fan of crossing breeds myself. I have always had labradors and only ever black ones and they are proven to be fab with the kids.
> I wasnt ready to breed her at this time just after some good quality advice which I have received so thanks everyone


I think that would be for the best if you are not ready to breed her!


----------



## Nightair (Feb 6, 2013)

I felt so strongly about the replies to your query about Labmaraners that I joined the forum just to give you the benefit of my experience, we have had Labradors all our life until 3 years ago when we bought 2 Labmaraners, these dogs are the best looking, temperament & intelligence of all the dogs we have ever had and I would hate for somebody to not have the chance that we have had because of some fascist, bigoted view on "pure bred" dogs. In my opinion it would be a complete waste of life to not allow these pups to be born. We paid £300 each for our dogs and they were a bargain, almost everyone that sees them comments on how beautiful they are. They are an integral part of our lives!


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

Nightair said:


> I felt so strongly about the replies to your query about Labmaraners that I joined the forum just to give you the benefit of my experience, we have had Labradors all our life until 3 years ago when we bought 2 Labmaraners, these dogs are the best looking, temperament & intelligence of all the dogs we have ever had and I would hate for somebody to not have the chance that we have had because of* some fascist, bigoted view on "pure bred" dogs.* In my opinion it would be a complete waste of life to not allow these pups to be born. We paid £300 each for our dogs and they were a bargain, almost everyone that sees them comments on how beautiful they are. They are an integral part of our lives!


I'm sure they are beautiful, as both Labs and Weims are very good looking dogs.

Also just to clarify: nobody here is a 'fascist' or a 'bigot' and there is no need to be insulting. The only thing people here tend to ask - me included - is if the parent dogs are tested for the conditions that afflict both breeds. e.g. in Labs, hip dysplasia.

I have no issue with cross breeds whatsoever - all I would ever hope to see is that BOTH parent dogs undergo any relevant health testing specific to their breeds. I would demand the same from purebred dogs too.

Nothing remotely 'fascist' about that!


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Nightair said:


> I felt so strongly about the replies to your query about Labmaraners that I joined the forum just to give you the benefit of my experience, we have had Labradors all our life until 3 years ago when we bought 2 Labmaraners, these dogs are the best looking, temperament & intelligence of all the dogs we have ever had and I would hate for somebody to not have the chance that we have had because of some fascist, bigoted view on "pure bred" dogs. In my opinion it would be a complete waste of life to not allow these pups to be born. We paid £300 each for our dogs and they were a bargain, almost everyone that sees them comments on how beautiful they are. They are an integral part of our lives!


I am sure they are lovely but breed enthusiasts do not support the use of the Weimaraner in crosses.

They may be a gundog but they are definitely NOT a labrador and have a far different history and purpose.

It is nothing to do with being BIGOTED or FASCIST it is to do with the amount of dogs which find themselves in rescue and which some of us have to assess and find homes for when people are overdogged.

I am not against DELIBERATE PLANNED cross breeding from suitably health tested breeding stock to fulfil a specific purpose as they do for GDBA but somebody but not from random events for the benefit of the dogs, owners and society in general.


----------



## Milliepoochie (Feb 13, 2011)

Nightair said:


> I felt so strongly about the replies to your query about Labmaraners that I joined the forum just to give you the benefit of my experience, we have had Labradors all our life until 3 years ago when we bought 2 Labmaraners, these dogs are the best looking, temperament & intelligence of all the dogs we have ever had and I would hate for somebody to not have the chance that we have had because of some *fascist, bigoted view *on "pure bred" dogs. In my opinion it would be a complete waste of life to not allow these pups to be born. We paid £300 each for our dogs and they were a bargain, almost everyone that sees them comments on how beautiful they are. They are an integral part of our lives!


Alot of the facist and bigoted viewed people you are referring to themselves have cross breeds and if you read the thread have nothing against crossbreeds.

But they choose to not support unethical breeders by paying money for dogs from less than perfect so called 'breeders'.

Nothing wrong with a planned X breeding where all health tests are in place where applicable - unless that is the case then why add to the current rescue crisis?

My girl is a Rottie -Shar Pei mix - She is calm and loyal - doesnt bark and is quite frankly amazing.

Would I recommend anyone else get one - hell No.

What kind of a prat breeds Rotties and Shar Pei's!:mad2:


----------



## dexter (Nov 29, 2008)

Nightair said:


> I felt so strongly about the replies to your query about Labmaraners that I joined the forum just to give you the benefit of my experience, we have had Labradors all our life until 3 years ago when we bought 2 Labmaraners, these dogs are the best looking, temperament & intelligence of all the dogs we have ever had and I would hate for somebody to not have the chance that we have had because of some fascist, bigoted view on "pure bred" dogs. In my opinion it would be a complete waste of life to not allow these pups to be born. We paid £300 each for our dogs and they were a bargain, almost everyone that sees them comments on how beautiful they are. They are an integral part of our lives!


wow strong post btw welcome aboard  as this thread is over 3 years old you may well have bought 2 of the puppies from the resulting mating!.


----------



## Paul Dunham (Apr 1, 2010)

majortom said:


> i just give up
> why are you breeding two differant breeds together
> what is your aim
> what about health checks etc
> ...


Oh dear, how did we manage to breed dogs before veterinarian science.. It must have been a miracle.. I do agree there's a great deal of irresponsible breeding these days.. We need to breed less of them to ensure good homes...


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

Paul Dunham said:


> *Oh dear, how did we manage to breed dogs before veterinarian science.. It must have been a miracle.*. I do agree there's a great deal of irresponsible breeding these days.. We need to breed less of them to ensure good homes...


Your points are not relevant. The reality is that when the dam and sire are not health tested, the puppies may well suffer from debilitating and sometimes life shortening conditions. These risks can be minimised by health testing.

There is also the issue of temperament: does a Weim x Lab cross make sense in terms of temperament? I'm not necessarily saying it doesn't but there are SO many Labs in rescue and more than a few Weims too....


----------



## ClaireandDaisy (Jul 4, 2010)

LOL - all this sound and fury about a mismate in 2009! One might almost suspect a troll.......


----------



## Paul Dunham (Apr 1, 2010)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> Your points are not relevant. The reality is that when the dam and sire are not health tested, the puppies may well suffer from debilitating and sometimes life shortening conditions. These risks can be minimised by health testing.
> 
> There is also the issue of temperament: does a Weim x Lab cross make sense in terms of temperament? I'm not necessarily saying it doesn't but there are SO many Labs in rescue and more than a few Weims too....


That's just BS veterinary marketing.. It's scare mongering.. The vast majority of pregnancies pass with little or no problems.. Any risk (however unlikely) can only be minimised by check up's.. (its not even a guarantee of no problems).. Weim x Lab temperament?? They're both dogs for Christ sake.. Your not crossing a dog with a cat.. They're both related to each other...

If the marketing people had their way, you couldn't turn left or right without consulting a vet.. It's ridiculous...


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

I have seen a Lab x Weim in my local rescue and he was a stunning dog. The physique was somewhere in between the 2 breeds and he was a dark silver (what would be called a Blue Weim in that breed) and just simply gorgeous.

I'm not sure they would be a dog i'd go out of my way to purchase from a breeder but if there was one in rescue then i'd be sorely tempted.


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

Paul Dunham said:


> That's just BS veterinary marketing.. It's scare mongering.. The vast majority of pregnancies pass with little or no problems.. Any risk (however unlikely) can only be minimised by check up's.. (its not even a guarantee of no problems).. Weim x Lab temperament?? They're both dogs for Christ sake.. Your not crossing a dog with a cat.. They're both related to each other...
> 
> If the marketing people had their way, you couldn't turn left or right without consulting a vet.. It's ridiculous...


No, it's not 'BS vet marketing' actually.

And I wasn't referring to the pregnancy - try reading what I actually *wrote.*

It is objective fact that if you don't do the health tests on the dam and sire, then certain conditions can affect the puppies when they're older. e.g. hip dysplasia. Perhaps you'd care to explain how the risk of a dog developing HIP DYSPLASIA is 'minimised' by the mother having 'check ups'.....???

The only way to truly minimise the risk is HIP SCORING. Which is one of the original points I was making and which you have conveniently ignored.

If you actually think that this is 'BS marketing' then you don't know much.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

Nightair said:


> I felt so strongly about the replies to your query about Labmaraners that I joined the forum just to give you the benefit of my experience, we have had Labradors all our life until 3 years ago when we bought 2 Labmaraners, these dogs are the best looking, temperament & intelligence of all the dogs we have ever had and I would hate for somebody to not have the chance that we have had because of some fascist, bigoted view on "pure bred" dogs. In my opinion it would be a complete waste of life to not allow these pups to be born. We paid £300 each for our dogs and they were a bargain, almost everyone that sees them comments on how beautiful they are. They are an integral part of our lives!


What a pity you didn't trouble to look at the date of the post while trawling through countless threads to find one you could feel strongly about.

As someone has already said, you may well have bought one of the puppies expected. What I would like to know is, how the hell did this happen? Why was a 23 month old lab in temptation distance of the weimie in the first place? I know nothing about breeding, but isn't she a little young anyway?


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

newfiesmum said:


> What a pity you didn't trouble to look at the date of the post while trawling through countless threads to find one you could feel strongly about.
> 
> As someone has already said, you may well have bought one of the puppies expected. What I would like to know is, how the hell did this happen? Why was a 23 month old lab in temptation distance of the weimie in the first place? I know nothing about breeding, but isn't she a little young anyway?


I dont think she is too young but that is totally beside the point. The OP explained exactly how it happened and it was a pure accident plus she was getting the mismate injection.
It was 3 years ago anyway so why has it been resurrected.


----------



## Paul Dunham (Apr 1, 2010)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> No, it's not 'BS vet marketing' actually.
> 
> And I wasn't referring to the pregnancy - try reading what I actually *wrote.*
> 
> ...


Hip dysplasia, hip scoring is the result of bad breeding practices by breeders within certain breeds.. It's undesirable condition in which the animal should never be bred from.. However the vast majority of breeds are not normally affected by it.. Tests only need to be carried out on breeds commonly affected by it.. Vets and their marketing machine would like to extend this to every breed to make money.. The next thing you know we'll need special tests to breed Budgies, bunny Rabbits and Stick Insects just to be sure there's no chance of them turning into mutant killers..


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Paul Dunham said:


> Hip dysplasia, hip scoring is the result of bad breeding practices by breeders within certain breeds.. It's undesirable condition in which the animal should never be bred from.. However the vast majority of breeds are not normally affected by it.. *Tests only need to be carried out on breeds commonly affected by it.. * Vets and their marketing machine would like to extend this to every breed to make money.. The next thing you know we'll need special tests to breed Budgies, bunny Rabbits and Stick Insects just to be sure there's no chance of them turning into mutant killers..


What, like Labs and Weimaraners then?


----------



## Paul Dunham (Apr 1, 2010)

labradrk said:


> What, like Labs and Weimaraners then?


If that's the case.. Yes.. What's interesting is some people argue for all the benefits of veterinary science.. there have been negative effects too.. Before the onset of veterinary science most breeds of dogs were much stronger because any of them carrying congenital defects died.. They only bred from the best, the strongest.. Veterinary science has facilitated the survival of these defective traits and these negative traits are more common today than anytime in history.. None of these breeds which carry these congenital defects should be bred from.. In certain respects veterinary science has made things worse...


----------



## dandogman (Dec 19, 2011)

Paul Dunham said:


> If that's the case.. Yes.. What's interesting is some people argue for all the benefits of veterinary science.. there have been negative effects too.. Before the onset of veterinary science most breeds of dogs were much stronger because any of them carrying congenital defects died.. They only bred from the best, the strongest.. Veterinary science has facilitated the survival of these defective traits and these negative traits are more common today than anytime in history.. None of these breeds which carry these congenital defects should be bred from.. In certain respects veterinary science has made things worse...


You could say the same for humans though...


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Paul Dunham said:


> If that's the case.. Yes.. What's interesting is some people argue for all the benefits of veterinary science.. there have been negative effects too.. Before the onset of veterinary science most breeds of dogs were much stronger because any of them carrying congenital defects died.. They only bred from the best, the strongest.. Veterinary science has facilitated the survival of these defective traits and these negative traits are more common today than anytime in history.. None of these breeds which carry these congenital defects should be bred from.. In certain respects veterinary science has made things worse...


1. Any of them carrying congenital defects died? so conditions such as hip dysplasia are now a death sentence? right...

2. Only the best were bred from? and you know this how? you don't; you are assuming. They didn't have the facilities/knowledge/equipment to "only breed from the best". So called defective traits have always existed; it is only now we are far more aware of them BECAUSE of the advances in veterinary science.

3. None of the breeds that can potentially develop health problems should be bred from? well that rules out 99% of breeds. Should we stop breeding people then? we have tons of health problems after all.


----------



## Paul Dunham (Apr 1, 2010)

labradrk said:


> 1. Any of them carrying congenital defects died? so conditions such as hip dysplasia are now a death sentence? right...
> 
> 2. Only the best were bred from? and you know this how? you don't; you are assuming. They didn't have the facilities/knowledge/equipment to "only breed from the best". So called defective traits have always existed; it is only now we are far more aware of them BECAUSE of the advantages in veterinary science.
> 
> 3. None of the breeds that can potentially develop health problems should be bred from? well that rules out 99% of breeds. Should we stop breeding people then? we have tons of health problems after all.


Now your taking the piss going over the top exaggerating.. Were talking major defects here.. Of course they had problems in the past and those were weeded out through lack of veterinary care.. You ever heard of survival of the fittest?? (that's what evolution is all about).. How on earth do wild animals manage to survive without our help.. Breeds in those days were inevitably stronger and survived because of the lack of veterinary science.. Are you seriously trying to tell me breeds are stronger today with less defects than in the past??? You said it yourself they're are tons of health problems.. Some problems which an animal couldn't survive without veterinary care or lead a productive life... No not a death sentence, people should stop breeding from animals which carry major health problems..


----------



## Malmum (Aug 1, 2010)

Paul Dunham said:


> Hip dysplasia, hip scoring is the result of bad breeding practices by breeders within certain breeds.. It's undesirable condition in which the animal should never be bred from.. However the vast majority of breeds are not normally affected by it.. Tests only need to be carried out on breeds commonly affected by it.. Vets and their marketing machine would like to extend this to every breed to make money.. The next thing you know we'll need special tests to breed Budgies, bunny Rabbits and Stick Insects just to be sure there's no chance of them turning into mutant killers..


Coo you don't half write a lot of [email protected] and I think you're doing so to get the response you desire to argue, no matter how uneducated you are showing yourself to be. So I'm not reading any more on this thread but try telling professor Noel Fitzpatrick that the vast majority of breeds aren't effected by hip dysplasia Veterinary Practice & Hospital | Specialist Orthopaedics + Neurosurgery | Fitzpatrick Referrals 
and then have a look at this.
http://www.petforums.co.uk/dog-health-nutrition/118528-diary-hip-replacement.html
Tow Labs on there, funny that eh???


----------



## Paul Dunham (Apr 1, 2010)

Malmum said:


> Coo you don't half write a lot of [email protected] and I think you're doing so to get the response you desire to argue, no matter how uneducated you are showing yourself to be. So I'm not reading any more on this thread but try telling professor Noel Fitzpatrick that the vast majority of breeds aren't effected by hip dysplasia Veterinary Practice & Hospital | Specialist Orthopaedics + Neurosurgery | Fitzpatrick Referrals
> and then have a look at this.
> http://www.petforums.co.uk/dog-health-nutrition/118528-diary-hip-replacement.html
> Tow Labs on there, funny that eh???


Have you never heard of a debate?? People putting their views forward and discussing them?? Or do you prefer people to always agree and pat each other on the back?? Instead of insulting someone why don't you come up with a coherent argument to support your case.. Instead of advertising the services of a veterinary practice.. I'm saying although veterinary science has had many positive advantages for animal welfare.. There have been some negative problems too.. That is not an unreasonable thing to say. And also the logic behind this assertion is perfectly sound too. They say it's taken between 12-14,000 years to domesticate dogs.. The vast majority of that time has been without veterinary science and the survival of the fittest.. That isn't crap...


----------



## Hanlou (Oct 29, 2012)

Paul Dunham said:


> The next thing you know we'll need special tests to breed Budgies, bunny Rabbits and Stick Insects just to be sure there's no chance of them turning into mutant killers..


Given that there's 8,000 + rabbits in rescue I would be very happy for neutering and spaying to be advocated by every vet in the country. 

Your points make very little sense.

Not every breed has health tests available, no. But if health tests *_are_* available that why on earth wouldn't you test to try and ensure that the offspring produced by the mating are as healthy as possible and will have the longest, happiest life possible?? 

For example in Rough Collies one of the 'health tests' is Collie Eye Anomaly -



> DNA test - CEA/CH
> Collie eye anomaly / Choroidal hypoplasia
> 
> Collie Eye Anomaly (CEA) is more technically known as Choroidal Hypoplasia (CH). It is a recessively inherited eye disorder that causes abnormal development of the choroid - an important layer of tissue under the retina of the eye. Since the choroid layer does not develop normally from the start, the primary abnormality can be diagnosed at a very young age. The symptoms and signs vary greatly among affected dogs within one breed, between parent and offspring and even within a litter. Most often the disease presents as a mild form in affected dogs and the presence of the disease can only be detected upon ophthalmologic examination; the dog retains normal vision throughout life. However, dogs with mild disease can produce severely affected offspring. The severe form of the disease presents with related problems with the health of the eye that can result in serious vision loss in some cases.


- Why would anyone even vaguely suggest that it isn't worth bothering with this test??


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Paul Dunham said:


> Now your taking the piss going over the top exaggerating.. Were talking major defects here.. Of course they had problems in the past and those were weeded out through lack of veterinary care.. You ever heard of survival of the fittest?? (that's what evolution is all about).. How on earth do wild animals manage to survive without our help.. Breeds in those days were inevitably stronger and survived because of the lack of veterinary science.. *Are you seriously trying to tell me breeds are stronger today with less defects than in the past??? * You said it yourself they're are tons of health problems.. Some problems which an animal couldn't survive without veterinary care or lead a productive life... No not a death sentence, people should stop breeding from animals which carry major health problems..


Your assumptions are purely speculative and nothing more. You do not _know_ that animals were healthier in the past any more than I do and there is exactly zero evidence to substantiate your claims. If you can provide me with such evidence I would be glad to receive it but as such records do not exist, I expect I will be waiting for a while.....

What is wrong with keeping an animal alive with veterinary care provided it has a good standard of life and is not suffering in any way? plenty of people are also still alive only through the marvels of modern medicine....or perhaps we should go back to the good old days and let them die too? bizarre logic.


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

Hanlou said:


> . . .
> For example in Rough Collies one of the 'health tests' is Collie Eye Anomaly -
> 
> - Why would anyone even vaguely suggest that it isn't worth bothering with this test??


Be very careful. I've heard/read MANY top breeders across the USA argue against the usefulness of this test.

I won't argue against it but the 'why would anyone' can throw a full bunch of top rated breeders under the bus.

As well the same for hip testing.

Paul Dunham is presenting much the same case that I have seen used over and over and over again with regard to both of these tests and, because I am a fan of Cavalier lists, even moreso with regard to heart protocols and specialist testing and MRIs for Cavaliers.

I'm just enjoying reading the conversation as I like to take in other people's reasoning and opinions and mull them over myself.

I favor testing, but I do recognise that it is not as black and white as some make it out to be and leave room for breeder discretion in some areas. That is also where I vote with my wallet. I believe different viewpoints, however, should always be discussable.

Hip testing in some breeds where it has been pushed is one that I see a lot of gray. That is because in North America breeders are commonly dissed and given the BYB label if they are not hip testing breeds that the UK doesn't seem to - Cockers, Cavaliers, Shih Tzus, Lhasa Apsos, Tibetan Spaniels. Those same breeders condemning those on their own soil for not testing will then import a UK dog from untested stock.

The hypocrisy blows me away when I see that. You either believe in tested stock, or you don't, or maybe what this is revealing is that they are using testing more as a promotional tool, differentiating themselves and declaring superiority through it. Certainly a generation or two of tested hips in Tibbies or Cavaliers from predominantly untested European lines doesn't give pups produced a great advantage.

On this topic there are some interesting thoughts on this blog as well where Chris also reports what I have observed with many breeders and CEA testing -



> . . . CEA affects less than 2% of Border Collies and among those affected the disease ranges from minor expression to serious impaired vision. There is no treatment. It's great there is a test and that most BC breeders have not given up the desire to work it out of their lines like most have in Rough and Smooth Collies where the gene is much more prevalent.
> 
> Rough and Smooth Collie breeders will tell you that CEA and the other eye disorders in their breed, despite being at near saturation levels, are not of much concern and there is little political will in that breed to do anything about it. * Basically, if the vast majority of your stock is going to fail the test, just stop taking the test, appears to be their plan of action. Some have gone so far as to demonize the clear dogs in those breeds.* - http://www.astraean.com/borderwars/2012/03/the-limits-of-health-testing.html


CC


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

labradrk said:


> Your assumptions are purely speculative and nothing more. You do not _know_ that animals were healthier in the past any more than I do and there is exactly zero evidence to substantiate your claims. If you can provide me with such evidence I would be glad to receive it but as such records do not exist, I expect I will be waiting for a while.....
> 
> What is wrong with keeping an animal alive with veterinary care provided it has a good standard of life and is not suffering in any way? plenty of people are also still alive only through the marvels of modern medicine....or perhaps we should go back to the good old days and let them die too? bizarre logic.


It is a fact that dogs in the past rarely saw a vet so any diseases or defects they had would not have been recorded. It is also unlikely that anyone would spend the equivalent of £3000 for a hip replacement for a dog, even assuming such a thing were possible.

My parents always had at least two dogs, and cats, and all sorts of other wildlife, but there was only ever one occasion when one of the saw a vet and believe me, he was so ill nothing could have been done for him.

Nobody had vaccinations, not even for puppies, so no way would they pay out for x-rays.

It is like everything else - it isn't that things are more common today, more that it is more common to record them.


----------



## button50 (Apr 16, 2012)

Jo P said:


> Perhaps a visit to the vets might be in order - did you not think of that instead of making up a silly name for a mongrel??


Out of order, Not suprised when i mention joining this to some of my friends they are totally turned off by things they read on here!


----------



## dexter (Nov 29, 2008)

button50 said:


> Out of order, Not suprised when i mention joining this to some of my friends they are totally turned off by things they read on here!


well you been around for awhile now soyou must like something about the forum


----------



## button50 (Apr 16, 2012)

dexter said:


> well you been around for awhile now soyou must like something about the forum


Im not easily offended, Made of stone lol


----------



## dexter (Nov 29, 2008)

button50 said:


> Im not easily offended, Made of stone lol


me too  sometimes you need to be lol


----------



## button50 (Apr 16, 2012)

dexter said:


> me too  sometimes you need to be lol


Helps with my job being in Sales. :thumbup:


----------



## dexter (Nov 29, 2008)

button50 said:


> Helps with my job being in Sales. :thumbup:


haha oh i love people like you not sky by any chance


----------



## button50 (Apr 16, 2012)

dexter said:


> haha oh i love people like you not sky by any chance


Thankfully not Software Sales :thumbup:


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

Paul Dunham said:


> Hip dysplasia, hip scoring is the result of bad breeding practices by breeders within certain breeds.. It's undesirable condition in which the animal should never be bred from.. However the vast majority of breeds are not normally affected by it.. Tests only need to be carried out on breeds commonly affected by it.. Vets and their marketing machine would like to extend this to every breed to make money.. The next thing you know we'll need special tests to breed Budgies, bunny Rabbits and Stick Insects just to be sure there's no chance of them turning into mutant killers..


Not sure how but you have managed to totally miss the point I was making.

Labs ARE a breed that is affected by hip dysplasia - hence my comment that if someone is mating a Lab and a Weim, the Lab should be hip scored!


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

comfortcreature said:


> Be very careful. I've heard/read MANY top breeders across the USA argue against the usefulness of this test.
> 
> I won't argue against it but the 'why would anyone' can throw a full bunch of top rated breeders under the bus.
> 
> ...


But the discussion on hip scoring was with specific reference to Labs, which as you know is a breed prone to hip dysplasia.


----------



## Paul Dunham (Apr 1, 2010)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> But the discussion on hip scoring was with specific reference to Labs, which as you know is a breed prone to hip dysplasia.


You accuse me of being argumentative.. My point wasn't breed specific.. It's a general point about breeds in general.. It was also Darwinian in concept.. A well trodden and proven concept of breeding the strongest with the strongest to breed strong animals.. It works.. Just like if you breed from sick animals with congenital defects you breed more sick animals... You don't need to be an academic and have a Ph.D to understand an already proven evolutionary scientific concept..
If a breed or a bloodline requires veterinary assistance just to survive then it's not a good idea to breed from it..


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> But the discussion on hip scoring was with specific reference to Labs, which as you know is a breed prone to hip dysplasia.


I read it as a more generalized point myself . . . going back to these two posts.



majortom said:


> i just give up
> why are you breeding two differant breeds together
> what is your aim
> what about health checks etc
> ...





Paul Dunham said:


> Oh dear, how did we manage to breed dogs before veterinarian science.. It must have been a miracle.. I do agree there's a great deal of irresponsible breeding these days.. We need to breed less of them to ensure good homes...


CC


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

lady_r0gue said:


> Personally I think they'd make beautiful intelligent healthy puppies, but I am a huge fan of mongrels and mixes; my dog's a Newfanieltriever!  What you call the litter he fathered with an Alsatian/1/4 Timberwolf I don't know... but they are GORGEOUS . I guess it might be harder to get top money for the pups but it wouldn't be a personal concern of mine. I guess I'd say (sadly) that the morning-after pill is the way if your heart is set on her breeding pure labs though...


Perfectly said!
you took the words righ outta my mouth ladyrogue!
x


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Nightair said:


> I felt so strongly about the replies to your query about Labmaraners that I joined the forum just to give you the benefit of my experience, we have had Labradors all our life until 3 years ago when we bought 2 Labmaraners, these dogs are the best looking, temperament & intelligence of all the dogs we have ever had and I would hate for somebody to not have the chance that we have had because of some fascist, bigoted view on "pure bred" dogs. In my opinion it would be a complete waste of life to not allow these pups to be born. We paid £300 each for our dogs and they were a bargain, almost everyone that sees them comments on how beautiful they are. They are an integral part of our lives!


the threads nearly four years old!
welcome back!


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Nightair said:


> I felt so strongly about the replies to your query about Labmaraners that I joined the forum just to give you the benefit of my experience, we have had Labradors all our life until 3 years ago when we bought 2 Labmaraners, these dogs are the best looking, temperament & intelligence of all the dogs we have ever had and I would hate for somebody to not have the chance that we have had because of some fascist, bigoted view on "pure bred" dogs. In my opinion it would be a complete waste of life to not allow these pups to be born. We paid £300 each for our dogs and they were a bargain, almost everyone that sees them comments on how beautiful they are. They are an integral part of our lives!


Wow, what a first post! Waste of life? Take a look at the dog rescue situation, no facism, or bigotry, just normal human nature, someone bred it, someone bought it, someone didn't want it. I am guessing the vast majority of those pups are from unplanned litters with no health tests to parents, there's nothing facist, or bigotted in telling anyone who's got a bitch up the duff where it isn't planned, to use the mismate, or misalignment jab, it's there for that reason, no matter what the parents. And the simple fact is, there are still too many people believing health tests aren't necessary when the parents are from different breeds, nothing facist or bigotted about that either, simple fact.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Paul Dunham, I wish someone would introduce health tests and conformation standards for budgies and other pets, I apologise now if I offend anyone, but some of the cats and rabbits etc I see do not look like healthy *animals*. I know for a fact that budgies are nothing like they are in the wild, and they are prone to a number of congenital defects and diseases, as I used to keep and breed them. About the only thing that I kept that wasn't prone to our wonderful *selective breeding* were tropical fish, but even that's since gone on to produce weird and wonderful creations, just look at some of the goldfish we've *created* that can hardly swim (edited to add, I am aware that these are cold water, but we've been keeping them longer than tropical fish and look what's happened), and have bubbles behind their eyes.

As for health tests, I do agree, we are never going to produce a 100% perfectly healthy animal, but when you have two parent breeds of a dog where hip scores are advised to be used to try and understand more about the dog in front of you that you may want to breed from, that information can be vital in making a decision, either whether you are going to breed at all, or the dog you are going to use.

I've argued a number of times on this forum and elsewhere, for using the BMS as intended, ie a mean score, not a cut off point, and wouldn't discount a dog with a hip score above the BMS, but not scoring at all is no excuse, not in this instance where it is recommended for both parent breeds.


----------



## Malmum (Aug 1, 2010)

A friends Mal has just tested N/N for Polyneuropathy - I expect PD reckons that's unnecessary too but as far as the Mal forum breeders are concerned its a wonderful breakthrough that this can now be tested for due to the dogs affected by it in the past. I can't see a problem with testing for whatever you can, after all breeding isn't natural selection any more its been intervened by man and that affects the gene pool surely!


----------



## swarthy (Apr 24, 2010)

lady_r0gue said:


> Personally I think they'd make beautiful intelligent healthy puppies, but I am a huge fan of mongrels and mixes; my dog's a Newfanieltriever!  What you call the litter he fathered with an Alsatian/1/4 Timberwolf I don't know... but they are GORGEOUS . I guess it might be harder to get top money for the pups but it wouldn't be a personal concern of mine. I guess I'd say (sadly) that the morning-after pill is the way if your heart is set on her breeding pure labs though...


Beautiful pups they might make - but ALL puppies are cute and beautiful (whether pedigrees or cross-breeds) - it's how they develop and what health conditions they might bring with them are the issues. How new owners will cope if the dogs have a high working instinct.

How will they cope of the pups develop genetic conditions which could have been prevented?

This can often lead to pups being dumped in rescue and shifted from pillar to post without a permanent home.

How will the owner cope if their lab rejects the pups? what if mum dies during whelping or a C-section? (someone recently stated this was scare-mongering - believe me it isn't - have a read through some of the breeding threads - there have been mums who've died, mums who've attacked and tried to eat / kill their pups when born.

I would most certainly be agreeing with the others and recommending the mis-mate jab.

Have both dogs had any health tests done? For Labradors they should be AT LEAST hipscored with a reasonable score and a current clear eye certificate and ideally PRA clear.

I am unfamiliar with the tests for Weimeraners, but I would guess at hips and eyes, hopefully with more experience of the breed will be able to tell you.

If you are going to breed, please do it properly - get the relevant health tests done for your girl, and then find yourself a mentor and a suitably matched stud dog both physically and on paper.


----------



## Bijou (Aug 26, 2009)

In the past the world of dog breeding was vastly different - bitches were left to whelp usually unaided and unsupervisd in outside kennels and stables - now they are swabbed, scanned given supplements and whelp indoors on specifically designed fleece vet bed.

Pups that looked sickly or that mum rejected were culled, those that were mismarked, surplus to requirements or the wrong sex were also culled -diseases like Distemper and Parvo also wiped out many litters, now we have universal vaccination and most pups that are born survive and we use the latest veterinary technology to ensure that even the sickliest pup is saved.

Close line breeding was usual and was the recommended route for all breeders - now we calculate co -efficients of inbreeding and scour the world for stock that is not closely related and those that use line breeding are roundly condemned - A dogs suitability for breeding was guaged on the way they looked , behaved,worked and moved - now we test for hereditary issues and reject even the best looking/working/moving/tempered dog on the basis of a high hip score or failed annual eye test.

Once dog breeding was led by the old style breeder who knew their line inside out - now it is led by scientists , welfare charities and 'instant expert' journalists.

Undoubtably we cannot turn back the clock but I do wonder if we have not gone too far theother way - it is true that dogs that should have been culled at birth are now able to pass their faulty genes on - it is also true that the twin requirements of ever increasing health tests combined with low co-efficients of inbreeding are incompatible ( how can you use testing to eliminate vast swathes of a breeds population and not also reduce the number of dogs available to be used ?).

Dog breeding has become a veritable minefield with many good breeders simply shrugging their shoulders at the impossibility of meeting everyones expectations and giving up, leaving the field wide open to those that could'nt give a flying ferret about anything except the money.


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

Paul Dunham said:


> *You accuse me of being argumentative.. My point wasn't breed specific..* It's a general point about breeds in general.. It was also Darwinian in concept.. A well trodden and proven concept of breeding the strongest with the strongest to breed strong animals.. It works.. Just like if you breed from sick animals with congenital defects you breed more sick animals... You don't need to be an academic and have a Ph.D to understand an already proven evolutionary scientific concept..
> If a breed or a bloodline requires veterinary assistance just to survive then it's not a good idea to breed from it..


I did not accuse you of being argumentative.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

Bijou said:


> In the past the world of dog breeding was vastly different - bitches were left to whelp usually unaided and unsupervisd in outside kennels and stables - now they are swabbed, scanned given supplements and whelp indoors on specifically designed fleece vet bed.
> 
> Pups that looked sickly or that mum rejected were culled, those that were mismarked, surplus to requirements or the wrong sex were also culled -diseases like Distemper and Parvo also wiped out many litters, now we have universal vaccination and most pups that are born survive and we use the latest veterinary technology to ensure that even the sickliest pup is saved.
> 
> ...


Good post with excellent points - but of course the vast majority of litters are born from unhealth tested parents and go to homes who know nothing about health testing and the vast majority of those do not have any inherited problems. It would be interesting but impossible to do a survey and see if there is actually any difference whatsoever in the incidence of HD between tested and untested parents. Because while breeders are thinking it is ok to breed from low score dogs that still carry the gene I cannot possibly see what difference it can make.


----------



## Paul Dunham (Apr 1, 2010)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> I did not accuse you of being argumentative.


Sorry, I apologise, it was someone else.. Sorry again...

Sleeping Lion...
Very eloquently put.. I understand your point about goldfish.. When you look at the likes of Bubble-eyed goldfish which have difficulty swimming.. Budgies too.. I'm a pretty outspoken critic of exhibition Budgies.. I did a post in the bird section about the Parlor Roller/Tumbler.. a breed of pigeon man has exploited for it's illness/disability.. There's a clip of them below.. This is said to be a form of epilepsy.. It's very similar to to what happens when ringing a birds neck..

My original post was scoffing at the ridiculous long shopping list of things someone should do before breeding.. It was not breed specific.. I agree with breeds known for defects such as Labs they should be tested and if found having the defect should not be bred from.. I said nothing about these animals being destroyed... only they should not bred from.. The only way to get back to having healthy animals is to breed from healthy animals..

2010 APRA PARLOR ROLLER Competition. Part 3/3 - YouTube


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

Paul Dunham said:


> You accuse me of being argumentative.. My point wasn't breed specific.. It's a general point about breeds in general.. It was also Darwinian in concept.. A well trodden and proven concept of breeding the strongest with the strongest to breed strong animals.. It works.. Just like if you breed from sick animals with congenital defects you breed more sick animals... You don't need to be an academic and have a Ph.D to understand an already proven evolutionary scientific concept..
> If a breed or a bloodline requires veterinary assistance just to survive then it's not a good idea to breed from it..


Sorry but survival of the fittest is not pertinent to domestic dog populations, it's a completely null and void argument where canines are concerned. If it was 'survival of the fittest' breeds like pugs would not exist, they cannot survive without humans just like many cannot. What we do with domestic dogs is artificially and selectively breed, not natural selection, therefore it's completely ignorant to imply that somehow 'the strongest survive' when the species is completely dependent.


----------



## Paul Dunham (Apr 1, 2010)

Phoolf said:


> Sorry but survival of the fittest is not pertinent to domestic dog populations, it's a completely null and void argument where canines are concerned. If it was 'survival of the fittest' breeds like pugs would not exist, they cannot survive without humans just like many cannot. What we do with domestic dogs is artificially and selectively breed, not natural selection, therefore it's completely ignorant to imply that somehow 'the strongest survive' when the species is completely dependent.


Of course it is when your talking about health issues... Your talking about environmental conditions.. How and where we keep them.. Nothing to do with health.. By breeding from unhealthy animals you produce more unhealthy animals.. That's an evolutionary concept.. That's a fact..


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

Paul Dunham said:


> Of course it is when your talking about health issues... Your talking about environmental conditions.. How and where we keep them.. Nothing to do with health.. By breeding from unhealthy animals you produce more unhealthy animals.. That's an evolutionary concept.. That's a fact..


And yet they are kept artifially alived, not culled or left to die like in the wild which is where natural selection takes place. I'll say again: If natural selection, rather than human led selective breeding, had anything to do with it we wouldn't have many of the breeds we have right now. It has naff all to do with 'evolutionary concepts' and I often find people who bandy such arguments about generally misuse them and don't fully understand what it is evolution is.


----------



## Paul Dunham (Apr 1, 2010)

Phoolf said:


> And yet they are kept artifially alived, not culled or left to die like in the wild which is where natural selection takes place. I'll say again: If natural selection, rather than human led selective breeding, had anything to do with it we wouldn't have many of the breeds we have right now. It has naff all to do with 'evolutionary concepts' and I often find people who bandy such arguments about generally misuse them and don't fully understand what it is evolution is.


By the sound of it you don't understand what evolution is about because you cannot separate health issues from natural or man made selection.. Whether an animal can survive in the wild has nothing to do with what we are discussing.. Just the principles of evolution.. It's a health issue about breeding from unhealthy animals.. Many captive bred wild animals cannot survive in the wild either and that's got nothing to do how they were bred or with health..

It's extremely simply.. A child can understand it.. It's not rocket science.. If you want to breed white ones you breed from white ones.. if you want to breed black then you breed from black.. If you you want to breed an animal for a certain characteristic you breed from animals with that characteristic.. Equally if you breed from unhealthy animals you WILL breed more unhealthy animals.. This selective breeding has everything to do with evolutionary concepts.. If you cannot see that then you know nothing about evolution.. You haven't understood it at all... Darwin studied breeds of domestic pigeons to help him understand the theory of evolution.. I think I'd rather take his word for it...


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Paul Dunham said:


> By the sound of it you don't understand what evolution is about because you cannot separate health issues from natural or man made selection.. Whether an animal can survive in the wild has nothing to do with what we are discussing.. Just the principles of evolution.. It's a health issue about breeding from unhealthy animals.. Many captive bred wild animals cannot survive in the wild either and that's got nothing to do how they were bred or with health..
> 
> It's extremely simply.. A child can understand it.. It's not rocket science.. If you want to breed white ones you breed from white ones.. if you want to breed black then you breed from black.. If you you want to breed an animal for a certain characteristic you breed from animals with that characteristic.. Equally if you breed from unhealthy animals you WILL breed more unhealthy animals.. This selective breeding has everything to do with evolutionary concepts.. If you cannot see that then you know nothing about evolution.. You haven't understood it at all... Darwin studied breeds of domestic pigeons to help him understand the theory of evolution.. I think I'd rather take his word for it...


The problem is that without testing, there is no unhealthy animal, until that animal becomes unhealthy 

Years ago, what would have been classed as lame on their front leg, is now elbow dysplasia, and we have a grading system which tells us what is good, and what is not, and recommendations on what grade is *acceptable* to breed from without having to see outward clinical signs of any problem. The problem with joints of course, is they are multifactorial, the dog may carry the gene(s), the gene(s) may be triggered, and/or the joint could be exacerbated by all sorts of environmental factors, including the time of year the pups were born. So for me, the grade is *information*, not necessarily a do or don't, depending on the rest of the dog(s) in front of you, theoretically speaking, although in real life, I doubt many at all would use a dog with a higher than recommended elbow grade, because the peer pressure from some quarters can be a real worry. I am certainly aware some breeders feel bullied and pressured into doing or saying things.

On the other hand, there are very few peole who even bother with this health test, and yet they aren't open to the same criticism (generally speaking) because there is no information there, good or bad, we seem fixated on *must not breed from xyz* and so the lack of information some how passes under the radar, where as in reality, it could be that many of those dogs that lack elbow grade results, have the type of poor result that wouldn't normally be considered good enough to breed on from.

Health testing for me is a very diverse topic, and isn't about excluding less than perfectly animals from a gene pool, more about knowing what it is we've got, and what we can use for the next generation, and the one after that, trying to make improvements where we can.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Paul Dunham said:


> Sorry, I apologise, it was someone else.. Sorry again...
> 
> Sleeping Lion...
> Very eloquently put.. I understand your point about goldfish.. When you look at the likes of Bubble-eyed goldfish which have difficulty swimming.. Budgies too.. I'm a pretty outspoken critic of exhibition Budgies.. I did a post in the bird section about the Parlor Roller/Tumbler.. a breed of pigeon man has exploited for it's illness/disability.. There's a clip of them below.. This is said to be a form of epilepsy.. It's very similar to to what happens when ringing a birds neck..
> ...


Haha, if only it were that simple! some conditions are polygenic (aka numerous genes are responsible, making them much harder to predict) and also have multifactorial influences (genetics, diet, exercise, etc.) that effect the severity of the condition. Hip dysplasia is one of those conditions. Put in plain and simple terms, you can breed two dogs with perfect hips and still end up with some dysplastic puppies. Yes the odds are significantly better in your favour when you are breeding from multi generations of low scoring parents but it is NOT impossible.

So how do you get around the fact that many congenital conditions are not easy to predict? I also wonder how you feel about carrier dogs/bitches.....should we eliminate outstanding specimens of a breed just because they are carriers?


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Phoolf said:


> And yet they are kept artifially alived, not culled or left to die like in the wild which is where natural selection takes place. I'll say again: If natural selection, rather than human led selective breeding, had anything to do with it we wouldn't have many of the breeds we have right now. It has naff all to do with 'evolutionary concepts' and I often find people who bandy such arguments about generally misuse them and don't fully understand what it is evolution is.


I think Paul is taking everything at a very basic face value and lacks an understanding of how complex genetic health problems are. People that lack understanding on this type of subject usually whip out the old 'evolution' and 'survival of the fittest' debate when it has exactly zero relevance.


----------



## Paul Dunham (Apr 1, 2010)

Hello Sleeping Lion,

Again you present a good argument.. Im not quite sure were talking about the same thing.. You seem to been talking about the gathering of information to learn, to understand and make an informed decision.. The methodology of how the science works to help us care for our animals. Im fully in favour of all of that..

Im talking what happens when we breed from defective animals.. Those defective genes are passed onto the next generation.. Im saying we shouldnt breed from them..

Whether an animal comes from the wild or captivity, natural selection or selection by man, it is no more than a selection process. In the wild animals are stronger because of harsh environmental factors.. In captivity the rules for selection are entirely different because selection is made by man.. Nothing to do whether they can survive in the wild.. The whole thing appears to be mathematical and simplistic in nature.. Which ever survives to reproduce evolution says, That formula was successful, well have some more of them. It seem mans circumvents this formula by selecting which genes should be passed on.. The mechanics are same.. This is why when bad decisions are made those bad genes are passed forward They are still evolutionary principles..


----------



## Paul Dunham (Apr 1, 2010)

labradrk said:


> I think Paul is taking everything at a very basic face value and lacks an understanding of how complex genetic health problems are. People that lack understanding on this type of subject usually whip out the old 'evolution' and 'survival of the fittest' debate when it has exactly zero relevance.


That's interesting you saying that because many of my friends are academics working within this field.. And although my assertions are simplistic in nature they are also in agreement with the general points.. Many genetic problems are extremely complex.. but the principles are very basic...

Instead of criticising... Why don't you come up with a coherent argument?? or don't you have one???


----------



## Paul Dunham (Apr 1, 2010)

labradrk said:


> Haha, if only it were that simple! some conditions are polygenic (aka numerous genes are responsible, making them much harder to predict) and also have multifactorial influences (genetics, diet, exercise, etc.) that effect the severity of the condition. Hip dysplasia is one of those conditions. Put in plain and simple terms, you can breed two dogs with perfect hips and still end up with some dysplastic puppies. Yes the odds are significantly better in your favour when you are breeding from multi generations of low scoring parents but it is NOT impossible.
> 
> So how do you get around the fact that many congenital conditions are not easy to predict? I also wonder how you feel about carrier dogs/bitches.....should we eliminate outstanding specimens of a breed just because they are carriers?


Obviously judging by your response this is an issue you haven't thought through.. Certain congenital defects can be recognised within bloodlines if not the individual animal.. Just because an individual animal is not effected by a congenital defect doesn't mean it's not carrying the bad genes.. These carrier animals/bloodlines should also not be bred from.. Yes we should eliminate these not so outstanding bloodlines which are causing problems..

This is all about bad breeding practices from dog breeders who inflict on the unsuspecting public sick and defective animals and saddle them with the vets bills because of the methods used to breed them...


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Your posts lack so much understanding and show an enormous amount of ignorance so I am going to bow out now. :mad2:


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Paul Dunham said:


> Hello Sleeping Lion,
> 
> Again you present a good argument.. Im not quite sure were talking about the same thing.. You seem to been talking about the gathering of information to learn, to understand and make an informed decision.. The methodology of how the science works to help us care for our animals. Im fully in favour of all of that..
> 
> ...


Everybody breeds from defective animals, there's no question of that. Natural selection does not breed a 100% healthy animal, it breeds animals that are *robust* enough to survive and possibly procreate, despite what other failings they may have, or diseases they may catch, or congenital defects they may be born with!

Tests are being developed all the time, there is a genetic test being developed for hereditary cateracts for Labradors, which it is thought will show that this is widespread amongst gene pools, and pretty much going to be impossible to breed clear from. It is however, more complex than simply knowing if a dog is a clear, carrier or affected, it's knowing about an individual genetic condition, how you can breed clear of it, what triggers it, is it late onset, early onset, is it something that alters quality of life? There is no point in breeding solely for a 100% perfectly healthy animal, and losing what the animal is along the way, you might as well just start cloning and fiddling with the genes at that stage rather than *breed* anything.


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

Paul as I'm reading along I'm understanding what you are suggesting.

One difficulty I have is with is this idea.



> . . . I'm talking what happens when we breed from defective animals.. Those defective genes are passed onto the next generation.. I'm saying we shouldn't breed from them. . . .


I have yet to know an animal that didn't, in all likelihood, carry a defect which is where this becomes problematic.

Are you suggesting that those with a known obvious defect should not be bred from? Where are you suggesting lines should be drawn? (I believe that answer gets incredibly complicated when taking into account what some suggest are conformation defects as well as health defects.) What about diversity in breeds where the non-defective dogs are rarer? Are you considering the loss of full breeds by this criteria and does that give you concern? Just curious.

As an example I know of a dog that could not pass a CERF clearance in age as he has a scar on his right eye (he was clear of PRA and all the known 'heritables'). In round eyed breeds this scarring - calcium deposit - sometimes occurs in age because the lids and tearing don't wash the eye as well as they should (yes I consider this a defect). Four gens down and his progeny have not suffered as he was used with less round eyed girls . . . the slight exaggeration was bred away from and it worked.

Some would have a hay day with the idea this breeder bred from a dog with a defective eye. I hope you are not suggesting similar.

CC


----------



## Paul Dunham (Apr 1, 2010)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Everybody breeds from defective animals, there's no question of that. Natural selection does not breed a 100% healthy animal, it breeds animals that are *robust* enough to survive and possibly procreate, despite what other failings they may have, or diseases they may catch, or congenital defects they may be born with!
> 
> Tests are being developed all the time, there is a genetic test being developed for hereditary cateracts for Labradors, which it is thought will show that this is widespread amongst gene pools, and pretty much going to be impossible to breed clear from. It is however, more complex than simply knowing if a dog is a clear, carrier or affected, it's knowing about an individual genetic condition, how you can breed clear of it, what triggers it, is it late onset, early onset, is it something that alters quality of life? There is no point in breeding solely for a 100% perfectly healthy animal, and losing what the animal is along the way, you might as well just start cloning and fiddling with the genes at that stage rather than *breed* anything.


Obviously there are no guarantees. I don't think anyone expects 100% guarantees.. It's the major reoccurring problems found in defective bloodlines which are the problem.. What trigger's things again is part of the learning and mechanic's of modern medicine.. Illnesses are expected.. I don't think you can ever be sure an animals clear of a genetic defect once its been bred into them.. I think the public should have a reasonable expectation when buying a dog of not having to spend a great deal of money at the vets because of bad breeding practices.. There are some bloodlines where veterinary intervention is pretty much guaranteed..


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Paul Dunham said:


> Obviously there are no guarantees. I don't think anyone expects 100% guarantees.. It's the major reoccurring problems found in defective bloodlines which are the problem.. What trigger's things again is part of the learning and mechanic's of modern medicine.. Illnesses are expected.. I don't think you can ever be sure an animals clear of a genetic defect once its been bred into them.. I think the public should have a reasonable expectation when buying a dog of not having to spend a great deal of money at the vets because of bad breeding practices.. There are some bloodlines where veterinary intervention is pretty much guaranteed..


Let's take my example above, regarding HC, which it is thought because of the nature of the condition, it is going to be widespread and difficult to breed clear from. If this is the case, and the vast majority of matings are going to produce at least carriers, should this breed be discontinued? What if it's found out that HC is prevalent amongst many, if not all breeds? I've certainly had a cross breed that's had cateracts as an oldie, so it could be something that it is pretty much impossible to breed clear from even by outcrossing. Do we just stop breeding because of one genetic defect which is nigh on impossible to breed clear of? Or do we just accept that as dogs get older they may get HC, like all of us, we degenerate, our joints get weaker, muscles aren't as well toned, eye sight goes, hearing goes etc. We are animals, in a permanent state of repair and decay and as we get older the decay takes over, we can't expect to be 100% healthy till the day we drop dead, we can only try and remain healthy by doing things that help us to be as healthy as possible. Where breeding dogs is concerned, it's a case of weighing up numerous points that contribute towards producing as healthy an animal as possible, that will also make a good companion. Some of that is through genetic testing, some of it is through x-rays and looking at the health of the joints, some of it is from looking at how a dog is built, has it got good conformation less prone to risk of injury, and are there any problems within the lines that produced that dog that perhaps need further investigation, or should be avoided? And at the end of all that, if the dog has a dodgy temperament, it's not worth it even if it's the healthiest dog in the world.


----------



## Paul Dunham (Apr 1, 2010)

comfortcreature said:


> Paul as I'm reading along I'm understanding what you are suggesting.
> 
> One difficulty I have is with is this idea.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the reply,

I'm talking about serious health defects.. If you look close enough you'll always find something.. You shouldn't be looking for perfection.. Yes I do think those breeds/bloodlines with serious defects which require veterinary intervention just to survive should be allowed to die out as a lesson to breeders who deliberately breed from animals with serious problems.. In the end they wind up polluting the rest of the gene-pool and destroying a breed.. I think the key word to emphasise is SERIOUS congenital defects..

I'm surprised I haven't been attacked more on this forum given the many people who keep and breed many of these animals.. If you want healthy animal, you should breed from healthy animals.. (or as healthy as humanly possible).. Breeders breed from bloodlines knowing full well there are common inherent problems with them..


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Paul Dunham said:


> Thanks for the reply,
> 
> I'm talking about serious health defects.. If you look close enough you'll always find something.. You shouldn't be looking for perfection.. Yes I do think those breeds/bloodlines with serious defects which require veterinary intervention just to survive should be allowed to die out as a lesson to breeders who deliberately breed from animals with serious problems.. In the end they wind polluting the rest of the gene-pool and destroying a breed.. I think the key word to emphasise is SERIOUS congenital defects..
> 
> I'm surprised I haven't been attacked more on this forum given the many people who keep and breed many of these animals.. If you want healthy animal, you should breed from healthy animals.. (or as healthy as humanly possible).. Breeders breed from bloodlines knowing full well there are common inherent problems with them..


Some people will always do what they want, and if you put limits in place for health testing, they will be the ones to ignore them, use the dogs they want anyway, and just lie on the paperwork. That's the nature of people, which is why it's so important for people to research where they buy a pup from. There are so called responsible breeders I wouldn't touch with a barge pole.


----------



## Paul Dunham (Apr 1, 2010)

Sleeping Lion..

Thank you very much for your replies.. In all honesty were going around in circles.. I think I've made my position pretty clear and there are a great deal of "What if" scenario's we can go through.. Worldwide it is universally accepted bad breeding practices have lead to major health problems with certain breeds.. That's a fact.. No amount of medical research or medical intervention is going to change the damage cause by these bad breeding practices.. These serious defective bloodlines should not be bred with and allowed to die out..

Obviously we can agree to differ and still respect one and others opinions even if we are at opposite poles..


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Paul Dunham said:


> Sleeping Lion..
> 
> Thank you very much for your replies.. In all honesty were going around in circles.. I think I've made my position pretty clear and there are a great deal of "What if" scenario's we can go through.. Worldwide it is universally accepted bad breeding practices have lead to major health problems with certain breeds.. That's a fact.. No amount of medical research or medical intervention is going to change the damage cause by these bad breeding practices.. These serious defective bloodlines should not be bred with and allowed to die out..
> 
> Obviously we can agree to differ and still respect one and others opinions even if we are at opposite poles..


Just to throw a spanner into your theory, we've also introduced problems with some breeds, by outcrossing to other gene pools. I'm thinking in particular of boxers here, where I think lines were introduced to the UK that brought in a heart defect.

I've been told that some UK lines of Labradors also have heart defects, although I've never come across this, but *trust* the person who I was talking to as telling the truth as they knew it. So by introducing UK lines, their gene pool has become *polluted*, but then was that because they test for this problem and know what they've got is clear, and we don't test, but don't come across any clinical signs?

It's a very complex topic, and there is no black and white, lots of shades of grey, but let's not go down that discussion route


----------



## Paul Dunham (Apr 1, 2010)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Just to throw a spanner into your theory, we've also introduced problems with some breeds, by outcrossing to other gene pools. I'm thinking in particular of boxers here, where I think lines were introduced to the UK that brought in a heart defect.
> 
> I've been told that some UK lines of Labradors also have heart defects, although I've never come across this, but *trust* the person who I was talking to as telling the truth as they knew it. So by introducing UK lines, their gene pool has become *polluted*, but then was that because they test for this problem and know what they've got is clear, and we don't test, but don't come across any clinical signs?
> 
> It's a very complex topic, and there is no black and white, lots of shades of grey, but let's not go down that discussion route


I dont see a spanner in my theory at all.. Just degrees and seriousness of defects and as you said, where to draw the line.. I think there are already breeds where the line has been crossed.. I guess the line has to be drawn or based on the amount of suffering and animal goes through.. The animals are not the only victims of these practices, but also their owners which pay the vets bills and have grown to love their animals.. You right it is a difficult one.. These questions need to be asked and debated however distasteful. This is a debate which is worth having because its about preventing suffering.. Im sure thats what we all want.. I think some people dont want to hear uncomfortable truths..


----------



## Bijou (Aug 26, 2009)

> I think some people don't want to hear uncomfortable truths..


...and I think some people over simplify the complexities involved .....if it were simply a matter of breeding away from a particular problem by not using affected lines then we could produce perfect health across all species ( including our own ) - but by concentrating on only one problem we run the very real risk of introducing another, perhaps worse one.

Reducing available breeding stock to the handful who are totally clear of things that we can test for is unsustainable -what should be our priority when breeding - temperament ?- construction ? -longevity ? - fertility - type ? - or simply producing dogs that pass their annual eye test ?- tell me what is the point of producing HD free dogs if their temperaments are so bad they are a liability ?....and don't forget that more dogs are on rescue or PTS because of poor temperament than because they have a high hip score.

Unless you know where the 'magic button' is that can produce it all then breeding will always be made up of compromises this does NOT mean that breeders don't care but that they are looking at the whole picture rather than just once aspect ...it's not the black and white issue that you are implying but much more than 50 shades of grey !


----------



## Nightair (Feb 6, 2013)

Well, I do seem to have stirred things up! I am sorry if my first post upset anyone but it just seemed that the only advice that was being given was for the owner to "get rid" of a litter of potentially excellent dogs. If you read the thread properly the owner was asking for information about Labmaraners, not whether they should let them live or not, I agree with everyone who calls for health checks but you can not presume that a litter is going to have problems because they are crossbred, quite the contrary, in my experience "pure bred" dogs seem to have more problems than crosses! If there are any other Labmaraner owners on this site (which I doubt) I am sure they would also be horrified at people advising them to be terminated. In America the Labmaraner is a very much sought after hybrid dog. www.facebook.com/Labmaraner


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

Nightair said:


> Well, I do seem to have stirred things up! I am sorry if my first post upset anyone but it just seemed that the only advice that was being given was for the owner to "get rid" of a litter of potentially excellent dogs. If you read the thread properly the owner was asking for information about Labmaraners, not whether they should let them live or not, I agree with everyone who calls for health checks *but you can not presume that a litter is going to have problems because they are crossbred, quite the contrary, in my experience "pure bred" dogs seem to have more problems* than crosses! If there are any other Labmaraner owners on this site (which I doubt) I am sure they would also be horrified at people advising them to be terminated. In America the Labmaraner is a very much sought after hybrid dog. www.facebook.com/Labmaraner


It isn't a case of crossbreed v purebreed.

And nobody is assuming that pups will have problems because they are crossbreeds. But the fact remains that in this example (Weim x Labs) at least one of the parent breeds is prone to several conditions including hip dysplasia.

Also I don't think one can state that purebreeds have more problems than crossbreeds. Pups from crossbreed parents can inherity health conditions from both parent breeds.

ALL dogs that are being mated should be health tested if the breeds are affected by any health conditions. Simple as that


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

. . . but we have buyers on this forum as well as everywhere who will tell you 'no health tests' are required for a breed when they buy a pup. I've seen this now with numerous breeds and ALL breeds and ALL dogs are prone to some health problems. They see 'no health tests required' and don't bother to ask.

How do you square that box?

I'm not defending this particular mating, but I don't believe it is any more reckless than purebred pups that are announced on here and for whom health testing is not requested as their breeds have 'no required testing'.

I believe the first recommendation to this breeder should have been - get some testing done if you haven't already. The Lab female was purchased for breeding from and therefore study in her lines had probably already taken place however the initial recommendations to mismate were polite and I understand that recommendation.

I tend to be reviled by the immediate recommendation to mismate in general of any litters so the thought process to recommend testing, even if after the fact, is probably a reflection of that.



> It isn't a case of crossbreed v purebreed.


Majortom's post on the first page, also, made sure to mention it WAS about producing crossbreed vs purebreed pups.

CC


----------



## toryb (Jul 11, 2011)

wow what a thread  Im not surpised some members dont ever come back to be honist  

I hope your son is ok and that everything turns out ok with your bitch


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

comfortcreature said:


> . . . but we have buyers on this forum who will tell you 'no health tests' are required for a breed when they buy a pup. I've seen this now with numerous breeds and ALL breeds and ALL dogs are prone to some health problems.
> 
> How do you square that box?
> 
> ...


Good breeding practice is in the minority here - it is really down to the mother nature that so many ARE healthy.


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

> I agree - there is no difference, but neither is good breeding.


Yes, neither is, but one seems to fly under the radar rather easily while the other creates a shitestorm of responses each time. I feel that is worth mentioning.

She did not ask about the Labmaraner breed. She specifically asked about the Labmaraner mixed breed so no 'lilelihood' of whether research on lines was done can be assumed by that mention. There was never a request for info on whether she had prelims done etc. . . . just an assumption that she did not.

I find that offensive when I read through . . . that nobody had the courtesy to even ask or to ask if there was a capability of getting them done if they were not.

Good to know about the UK situation re breeding . . . it is very different from here, but when I go to the OPs three other posts I get the impression she was not a young ignorant person which she seemed to have been assumed to be. She was a mom whose dog was mated when she was in a precarious position handling an injured child.

The comments assuming she was a troll are probably why she left the forum.

CC


----------



## Rubydooz (Jun 19, 2012)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> ALL dogs that are being mated should be health tested if the breeds are affected by any health conditions. Simple as that


I catch up with this forum every day, I breed cross breeds... Cockapoos. My Cockapoo bitches are DNA clear for Prcd-PRA, DNA clear for FN, Hip And elbow scored, and checked by my vet for luxating patella. The studs I use have also been fully health tested for the above as well as being DNA profiled for another 28 genetic diseases that can affect both of the pure breeds in this cross.

While I understand a greater debate has been born from the OP, it is in the best interests of any dog born regardless of breed to ensure the relevant health tests have taken place. Therefore regardless of the breed/ cross the fact of the matter is these tests have not taken place due to the accidental circumstances.

In the grand scheme of things, health testing is, although an important part of breeding, only one part nevertheless. Bringing up well rounded, socialised puppies is hard work and definitely food for thought for the OP.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

romandog said:


> Unfortunately this afternoon a beautiful weimaraner dog has (most likely)fertilised our Labrador bitch (23 months old)!
> 
> We were saving her to breed with another Lab but does anyone know of Labmaraner mixed breed? Its a new one on me, but I have a feeling it could make nice pups - she is black and he is silver.
> 
> ...





Nightair said:


> Well, I do seem to have stirred things up! I am sorry if my first post upset anyone but it just seemed that the only advice that was being given was for the owner to "get rid" of a litter of potentially excellent dogs. If you read the thread properly the owner was asking for information about Labmaraners, not whether they should let them live or not, I agree with everyone who calls for health checks but you can not presume that a litter is going to have problems because they are crossbred, quite the contrary, in my experience "pure bred" dogs seem to have more problems than crosses! If there are any other Labmaraner owners on this site (which I doubt) I am sure they would also be horrified at people advising them to be terminated. In America the Labmaraner is a very much sought after hybrid dog. www.facebook.com/Labmaraner


If you can tell me anywhere from that first post, that this was a planned mating, I'll eat my flatcoat. If specifically says she was *preparing* to use another dog. Perhaps I read it wrongly, but hopefully, somewhere in those preparations would be health tests, looking at how the animals mature individually to see if they are compatible size wise for one; my youngest Labrador is just under the size range for bitches, she's about 21.5 inches so far, I don't think she'll grow much taller, I've seen Weimerarners twice her height!

If you are going to *breed* full stop, you don't just accept an accident has happened and think, well I was gonna do *something* like that in any case. I find many breeds beautiful, and functional, it doesn't mean that every single accidental mating should make it's way into the world simply because someone somewhere thinks they are beautiful dogs.


----------



## OwnedByAYellowLabrador (Feb 9, 2013)

Rubydooz said:


> I catch up with this forum every day, I breed cross breeds... Cockapoos. My Cockapoo bitches are DNA clear for Prcd-PRA, DNA clear for FN, Hip And elbow scored, and checked by my vet for luxating patella. The studs I use have also been fully health tested for the above as well as being DNA profiled for another 28 genetic diseases that can affect both of the pure breeds in this cross.
> 
> While I understand a greater debate has been born from the OP, it is in the best interests of any dog born regardless of breed to ensure the relevant health tests have taken place. Therefore regardless of the breed/ cross the fact of the matter is these tests have not taken place due to the accidental circumstances.
> 
> In the grand scheme of things, health testing is, although an important part of breeding, only one part nevertheless. Bringing up well rounded, socialised puppies is hard work and definitely food for thought for the OP.


You are a an ethical, caring breeder.

I wish all breeders were like you!


----------



## OwnedByAYellowLabrador (Feb 9, 2013)

comfortcreature said:


> Yes, neither is,* but one seems to fly under the radar rather easily while the other creates a shitestorm of responses each time. I feel that is worth mentioning.*
> 
> She did not ask about the Labmaraner breed. She specifically asked about the Labmaraner mixed breed so no 'lilelihood' of whether research on lines was done can be assumed by that mention. There was never a request for info on whether she had prelims done etc. . . . just an assumption that she did not.
> 
> ...


Lately I have responded to several threads where people are planning on buying purebreed pups. Every single time, myself and others have immediately asked if the breeders have done all the relevant health tests on the dam and sire. So no - it isn't a case of these questions only being asked with regard to crossbreeds.

I accept that on past threads, which you linked to in another recent thread, some people *were* impolite but if we're talking about what goes on *now*, then health testing is raised with BOTH purebreeds and crossbreeds.


----------



## swarthy (Apr 24, 2010)

Bijou said:


> ...and I think some people over simplify the complexities involved .....if it were simply a matter of breeding away from a particular problem by not using affected lines then we could produce perfect health across all species ( including our own ) - but by concentrating on only one problem we run the very real risk of introducing another, perhaps worse one.
> 
> Reducing available breeding stock to the handful who are totally clear of things that we can test for is unsustainable -what should be our priority when breeding - temperament ?- construction ? -longevity ? - fertility - type ? - or simply producing dogs that pass their annual eye test ?- tell me what is the point of producing HD free dogs if their temperaments are so bad they are a liability ?....and don't forget that more dogs are on rescue or PTS because of poor temperament than because they have a high hip score.
> 
> Unless you know where the 'magic button' is that can produce it all then breeding will always be made up of compromises this does NOT mean that breeders don't care but that they are looking at the whole picture rather than just once aspect ...it's not the black and white issue that you are implying but much more than 50 shades of grey !


Never a truer word spoken (don't think I am allowed to "rep" you again) - but in particular, if recessive gene carriers and genetically affected asymptomatic dogs are removed from gene pools based solely on this single factor - a few years / generations down the road - explosive problems could be building, particularly where the gene pool for a breed is already small - but make no mistake - this applies to numerically larger breeds with bigger gene pools as well


----------



## swarthy (Apr 24, 2010)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> Also I don't think one can state that purebreeds have more problems than crossbreeds. Pups from crossbreed parents can inherity health conditions from both parent breeds.
> 
> ALL dogs that are being mated should be health tested if the breeds are affected by any health conditions. Simple as that


We often hear people talk about "hybrid vigour" - crossing 2 breeds doesn't create hybrid vigour - it is more complex than that and doesn't emanate from crossing two types of the same species.

No-one can dictate what components of a parent a pup will inherit - so even if one of the parents of the cross-breed doesn't share the same problems as the other parent, unless it's a straight recessive gene condition - there are simply no guarantees some, or even all of the pups will be immune to the condition of the "unaffected parent".

And as we know - the minute you get to a second generation cross - the progeny are more exposed to the conditions affecting both parents - therefore the parents of F2 crosses actually need MORE health-tests than either of their originating pedigree parents.

People talk on how many breeds have been created - and historically indeed, some of them have - this is one reason why conditions exist or continue to appear in breeds and across breeds.

If you look back at Labrador Pedigrees you will see there are Flatcoats and Interbred retrievers in their ancestry (Interbred is the opposite of inbreeding i.e. it is the bringing together of two similar types - say a F/C and a Goldie, or a Goldie and a Lab) - as some people do tend to get the terms confused)


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

> We often hear people talk about "hybrid vigour" - crossing 2 breeds doesn't create hybrid vigour - it is more complex than that and doesn't emanate from crossing two types of the same species.


Please clarify what you mean when you make statements like this. This is incorrect information.

Hybrid vigour is complex. It does not offer 'guarantees' if that is the point you are getting at (I still don't know why anyone would think it does and I don't believe many, if any, think it does) however hybrid vigour does emanate from crossing two types of the same species.

Some people have worked very hard at spreading the misinformation that hybrid vigour only applies to 'species' crosses by cleverly using a partial quote. This idea has become an internet myth. It is a shame as there are students who come in believing stuff like this and it is a disservice to them.

From the original reference that the misquoted idea about 'species' comes from -

"From a taxonomic perspective, hybrid refers to:

-Offspring resulting from the interbreeding between two animals or plants of different species.[2] See also hybrid speciation.

-Hybrids between different subspecies within a species (such as between the Bengal tiger and Siberian tiger) are known as intra-specific hybrids. Hybrids between different species within the same genus (such as between lions and tigers) are sometimes known as interspecific hybrids or crosses. Hybrids between different genera (such as between sheep and goats) are known as intergeneric hybrids. Extremely rare interfamilial hybrids have been known to occur (such as the guineafowl hybrids).[3] No interordinal (between different orders) animal hybrids are known.

-*The third type of hybrid consists of crosses between populations, breeds or cultivars within a single species.* This meaning is often used in plant *and animal breeding,* where hybrids are commonly produced and selected because they have desirable characteristics not found or inconsistently present in the parent individuals or populations. This flow of genetic material between populations or races is often called hybridization."- Agricultural Marketing​
------------------------------

Basics:

Each gene location has room for two alleles.

Every pup, at every gene location, inherits a single allele from each parent.

In breeds that have closed populations many of the alleles shared by the parent dogs have been passed down from the same founders. This means that many of the alleles those pups match together at a gene location will be from the same dog in their distant past. Scientifically this is considered an 'inbred' population.

If a pup is from parents that are completely unrelated the two alleles will be not from the same dog from the past. They will be from two different dogs. This is especially true if the parents are from two breeds that have been long separated into their own populations. The pups are called hybrids.

Generally there is a health and size advantage to having unmatched alleles at each gene location. That is called hybrid vigour.

The disadvantage is that predictability of a hybrid is much less than that of a pure bred. Hybrids tend to be larger than their purebred parents - for those interested in small crosses this can be problematic. I've seen 13 and 16 pound parents paired for 25 pound pups when that size was no where in the background of those parents.

Hybrid vigour cannot undo the effect of passing on ill health if both parents are from lines with bad health. There are no guarantees with hybrid vigour. It is, however, a legitimate breeding tool, and that should be recognized. We should not be accepting the spread of misinformation which suggests it is limited to just species crosses.

Of course cattle breeders have been using this to their advantage for 50 years that I am aware of.

1.In general usage, hybrid is synonymous with heterozygous: any offspring resulting from the mating of two genetically distinct individuals
2.a genetic hybrid carries two different alleles of the same gene - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_(biology)​
From everythingbio.com

Definition of hybrid :

(1) A heterozygote.
(2) A progeny individual from any cross involving parents of differing genotypes. Offspring of unlike parents. 
(3) A duplex polynucleotide, formed by hybridization of two single stranded polynucleotides of different origin.

Definition of hybrid vigor :

increased vitality (compared to that of either parent stock) in the hybrid offspring of two different, inbred parents - hybrid vigor : Definition​
From the New Mexico State University Biology Program

Hybrid Vigor - Heterosis

Hybrid Vigor or Heterosis: An increase in the performance of hybrids over that of purebreds, most noticeably in traits like fertility and sterility (Crossbreeding definition).

Hybrid Vigor or Heterosis: An increase in the performance of hybrids over that of purebreds from linebred families, most noticeably in traits like fertility and sterility (linebreeding definition) - Hybrid Vigor - Heterosis​


> . . . And as we know - the minute you get to a second generation cross - the progeny are more exposed to the conditions affecting both parents - therefore the parents of F2 crosses actually need MORE health-tests than either of their originating pedigree parents. . .


In the second generation cross the progeny are not 'more' exposed . . . they can be 'as' exposed as the highest exposed parent breed/line and if THOSE original parent dogs weren't tested or were used even when risky, then exposure increases. If each parent breed has different tests then all the tests from both breeds have to be done before these pairings should be made. For the majority of breeds that means just two or three tests - small breeds - patella, eyes and heart usually. There are some breeds with more, of course.

CC


----------

