Once the litter is produced, it's at the breeder's discretion to pull the dog from the program or continue.
With regards to the offspring, if you are on a pet contract and plan to spay/neuter your dog before a year, prelim x-rays between 6 months - 1 year would go a long way in indicating the hip formation of your dog as they mature into adulthood. If you don't plan on spay/neuter, I would still advise pet owners to get their puppies hips x-rayed before 1-year old.
It's unfortunate that the importation of Shikoku carries this risk because breeders in North America are committed to the preservation of the breed, but one hopes not at the expense of the health of the future offspring being unloaded to future owners.
so - reading those threads, Jesse put up- If the only thing wrong with Shogun is mild HD, (and he is an import so I am assuming he is less-related to the NA dogs, and bringing some attributes that made him worth importing) - isn't it feasible to just breed him to better-hip-rated females? Is 'mild' HD enough to cull him from a breeding program, or is there more? I dont know the shikoku breeding situation veyr well...
@WrylyBrindle I assume it has to do with the population at large and improving the breed as a whole over multiple generations. When it comes to breeding, you want to choose an animal that is average or better in whatever aspects you deem important. (Health clearances should definitely be important.) If the average population has mild or worse dysplasia, then a dog who is mild himself may be okay to consider. However, if the average population scores "fair" then a mild dog should be culled from breeding so that the dog's genetic contribution will not bring down the average. (By that same token, if the average population scores "good" then even a "fair" dog should be culled.) Additionally, when you have a very small population, each dog's contribution to future generations has a greater impact on the average.
Honestly, I don't understand what's going on with the Shikoku breeding programs very well.
I can understand continuing to breed a dog that is clear but has produced dysplasia in his pups. Avoid a repeat breeding and see if the next litter has clears. I got that.
I can understand breeding a dog with dysplasia to a dog with a much better rating. It sounds like a test breeding to me. But until the pups produced have shown that the dysplasia has been reduced, I don't understand doing another breeding even if with a different mate.
I can kinda understand breeding a dog before his hips are known. Someone has determined that he's going to be used regardless of the results. Kinda like the test breeding. But then that someone has changed their minds that now it is important before evaluating the pups?
Basically, why the hurry in deciding what to do with the dog before it's known how the pups are turning out?
I'm not going to even begin to speculate Katja's decision. She's been doing this a long time and she knows her Shikoku lines well. I put forth those posts as a point of discussion and perspective for F1 puppy owners (1st generation puppies of imported dogs).
To echo @ayk: With how few Shikoku there are, was this male bred with coat being the primary factor? The more I research Shikoku as a potential little brother for Ren, the more health issues that are becoming apparent (ex. rear dew claws, hips, neuro issues, etc), with the sires and dams still being paired up. Not to mention a few lacks of generation gaps (minor inbreeding) in particular litters.
As a species-wide questions, not a Shogun-specific question, what is the general "weight" given to the different breeding traits? It seems Shikoku are at critically small numbers, so, if anything, health and joints should be the primary factors, with coat (aka "show" factor) being lower on the list of importance.
Also, is it not a major point in "ethical breeding" to get the hips and joints checked prior to breeding?
To further reinforce, these questions come from doing personal research on the breed as part of being a responsible potential customer of the kennels that breed these dogs, not to instigate.
Because the dog has mildly dysplastic hips, they can be bred as someone stated above, to an excellent female. I don't know if the progeny is affected. But it's definitely breeder's option in a rare breed where we need as much diversity as we can get.
@cezieg IMO health is important and should always come first, however, if you're not going to breed for quality (what you call "show factor") and improvement of breed traits, then the whole point of purebred dog breeding has been lost. Might as well just breed healthy working mutts. (Nothing wrong with that!)
I have nothing to contribute to the discussion other than this one though: It's a real shame that the owners of puppies out of Shogun, like @ryananthony, have to find out about this issue on a public forum and not directly from their breeder.
@cezieg IMO health is important and should always come first, however, if you're not going to breed for quality (what you call "show factor") and improvement of breed traits, then the whole point of purebred dog breeding has been lost. Might as well just breed healthy working mutts. (Nothing wrong with that!)
It's a misnomer to be breeding for "quality" when the health is not considered of primary importance. That's how American breeding programs became what they are, with show line GSD and GS having terrible hips and joints, but because its a breed wide issue the emphasis is on the coat and appearance.
I haven't done enough reading on genetics, as you have, to be able to full weigh in on the ease of selection for coat aka quality vs health. However, it's my opinion that its more ethical to begin with a healthy dog first and foremost, and then pursue refinement of the coat and "quality. Instead of starting with a fantastic coat/quality, but with messed up physiques and joints.
There may be a system set up that prioritizes coats, just as there is an established system in agriculture (my field of study), but it's not hard to know that it's not the best method for the modern day. Especially with so few dogs.
@poeticdragon From his reaction, it doesn't look like she did.
It sucks too because she charges an arm, a leg, your left nut (if you have one), and a chunk of your soul for a pup. For that price the Shikoku pup should have impeccable health and must crap out gold!
Yea. So like @ryananthony , I'm an owner of one of the pups and I'm pretty concerned because I am a natural worrier.
I know very little about hip dysplasia in dogs. I was wondering if anyone can put into context the likelihood that my little Jack will experience problems. He is a pet and I'm not planning on breeding. All I care about is that he is able to have a long and active life. Apparently Kimi, his dam, is just fine. If anyone could reference threads or useful articles on the subject, I would be very appreciative.
@twobirds, is Jack been neutered or do you plan to neuter him? What you can do is when it comes time to neuter him is to also get his hips x-ray and OFA prelim. That way you can get a look at how his joints look and if you need to be concerned. I would hold off until he is at least a year old so the x-rays are more accurate.
eta, the reason why I bring up neuter is because the cost of x-ray is a lot cheaper since he'd be out anyways. If he is already neutered or don't plan to, then you can just get the x-rays done on their own though it will be a bit more pricey.
@poeticdragon I was going to just edit my last post, but there's too many posts after it now and I was on my phone earlier at a restaurant. Don't take this as "I'm correct due to tactics of overwhelming response!"
I am 100% for the improvement and continuation of breed specific traits to maintain what a Nihon Ken is, and to not just have a pretty looking mutt.
However, it's a fallacy to set exactness of coat at the highest tier of breed "quality".
If, to use your situation as an example due to running a breeding program, you would want to maintain 100% breed traits then it would be legitimate to breed your dogs to be stand-off'ish, confrontational, and more defensive than they are. That's a major trait of the traditional temperament of the NK breeds, mostly due to their historic treatment as tools or livestock (who in today's ethics would be considered neglected), rather than family members.
It's only recently that dogs in Japan are beginning to be considered parts of the family, rather than outdoor animals. The breeding of "family friendly" NK is a Western trait selection in the breed, and a violation of their traditional "quality". Therefore, it's even more reason to be breeding for a healthy foundation, and selecting coat/"quality" from there. Your pups who happen to have a white spot on their necks are no less Akita Inus than your pups with Standard-perfect coats.
As in the JA, Shikoku who are bred for health and have some coat deviation would make the breeders no less money, and in a few generations of reselecting for coat then it wouldn't be much of a title loss... as if it's hard to gain titles in dog showing nowadays anyways. It's become a matter of perseverance and point accumulation, rather than single judgements that have any heft to them.
@twobirds since he's not a small breed dog, I'd recommend radiographs at 2 years since he'll be fully bone/growth mature by then. That's the figure used in the handful of veterinary practices I've worked at. I also got Tsune, my previous Shiba, neutered at a low cost neuter/spay practice that had a new, state of the art neuter-mobile with full general anesthesia. Overall it was $75, $60 for the neuter, $15 for donation + meds. Then you could just stash the full cost neuter money for the x-rays.
@Hinata23 For real! That's why I'm looking at importing Hokka/Shikoku instead of purchasing one in the US.
I think there's been too much speculation that the decision to breed was based on coat. Sure, he has a thick one, but that trait isn't lacking in the other breeding Shikokus.
I really don't believe the people involved would be swayed by that one trait.
More likely, I would believe that they hoped he would be an outcross that would help get away from the other health issues already in the U.S. Reproductive issues, in particular.
@ayk The topic got derailed a bit into a "too specific" part of breeing by the mini-convo between @poeticdragon and I :P
To put emphasis back on the main concern, the main critique and questioning was over breeding him before the 1.5 - 2 year x-rays and without joint certifying. Thereby passing on the joint issues without even knowing they existed in the first place, which doesn't qualify as "Better Breeding Practices".
@cezieg I don't disagree with you, but I feel the point I was trying to make was lost. I shall restate it more simply: Health and conformation should not come at the sacrifice of the other. One should not breed a dog with "messed up physique" as you put it, nor should one breed a dog that deviates from the breed standard. When I refer to quality I mean the basic traits that define the breed, not all the stuff that makes a dog win titles and accolades. Moreover, every breeding decision should be made to improve upon the last generation in some respect, without losing what you have already gained. On that note, one cannot simply "reselect for coat in a few generations" if you've already bred it out of the (available) population. Once its gone, its gone forever. So you do what you can to keep desirable traits in the gene pool.
@twobirds, @ryananthony - hip dysplasia, as I understand it, can range from very mild to fairly severe. Mild HD is not a problem in a companion, though you should be aware of and address it via supplements (and mild restriction of activity). Most dogs that are mildly dysplastic lead lives fairly unencumbered by the condition.
Only some vets are qualified to do the normal health certifications. I would check with your current vet and let them know the situation. Some vets, though they will send you to another vet for the evaluation, can give you small pointers on what to look out for and things to do (we had this recently since a half sibling out of the same sire developed glaucoma; my breeder does a gonioscopy but I'm still paranoid).
Best thing to do is to speak with both your vet and breeder. See if you can get a record of the hip evaluation from your breeder. A good vet will let you know what they think the risk factor may be and how you should proceed in terms of evaluation/prevention.
Canine Hip Dysplasia (CHD) can lead to arthritis at a young age. CHD is polygenic, meaning it is caused by multiple genes interacting with each other, and its inheritance is not a simple punnett square. CHD is affected/caused by environment moreso than most heritable disorders.
@cezieg I don't disagree with you, but I feel the point I was trying to make was lost. I shall restate it more simply: Health and conformation should not come at the sacrifice of the other. One should not breed a dog with "messed up physique" as you put it, nor should one breed a dog that deviates from the breed standard. When I refer to quality I mean the basic traits that define the breed, not all the stuff that makes a dog win titles and accolades. Moreover, every breeding decision should be made to improve upon the last generation in some respect, without losing what you have already gained. On that note, one cannot simply "reselect for coat in a few generations" if you've already bred it out of the (available) population. Once its gone, its gone forever. So you do what you can to keep desirable traits in the gene pool.
Fair enough. Not going to lie, I was playing Okami and did not have my full attention given to your response :P I missed that particular point.
Breeding it out of the population like that, however, is a bit of an exaggeration. Two generations or so to reinforce joint health, or eliminating rear dew claws, doesn't sound like a Standard Doomsday. Especially when that healthy base would, by necessity, be bred to an unrelated partner. A wholesale "There's no rules! Forget the Standard completely!" would be just as irresponsible, and I agree wholeheartedly.
Anyhow, it just seems Shogun was bred for less than honorable purposes, perhaps to recoup import cost, and it was, unfortunately, never clarified. The more I research US Shikoku breeding ops the more unscrupulous at worst, or irresponsible at best, it seems. Not to alarm any new Shikoku owners, because each dog is a blessing and regardless of any issues will certainly bring joy to the owner's life. I just had higher expectations after reading the mission of the NASC + the purchasing fees equivalent to the dog's weight in gold, in relation to the health states of quite a few of these pups.
It is not an exaggeration but it is based on an assumption.
Lets say there are only two traits which define a dog -- good/bad coat and good/bad hips. Obviously a dog with bad coat and bad hips is right out of the question and is culled immediately. Likewise, if dogs exist which have both good coat and good hips, then they are the obvious breeding choice above all others. So lets look at the other two possibilities instead.
My assumption for this little theoretical situation was that we were considering dogs with good coat with bad hips versus bad coat with good hips. If you cull the dogs with good coat and bad hips, then good coat is gone forever. It is not an exaggeration, it is not after a large number of generations. You have limited your breeding population to only dogs with bad coat and good hips, and the ONLY way to get that good coat back into the population is to breed to one of those bad-hipped dogs you previously culled.
If you breed your good coat with bad hips dog to a bad coat with good hips dog you run the risk of getting bad coat with bad hips -- but you also have a chance to get good coat with good hips, something which previously did not exist in this theoretical population.
Comments
shogun is gorgeous wish I met him when I went to Akashima's
Previous threads regarding breeding:
http://nihonken.org/forum/index.php?p=/discussion/comment/103151#Comment_103151
http://nihonken.org/forum/index.php?p=/discussion/comment/124805#Comment_124805
Once the litter is produced, it's at the breeder's discretion to pull the dog from the program or continue.
With regards to the offspring, if you are on a pet contract and plan to spay/neuter your dog before a year, prelim x-rays between 6 months - 1 year would go a long way in indicating the hip formation of your dog as they mature into adulthood. If you don't plan on spay/neuter, I would still advise pet owners to get their puppies hips x-rayed before 1-year old.
It's unfortunate that the importation of Shikoku carries this risk because breeders in North America are committed to the preservation of the breed, but one hopes not at the expense of the health of the future offspring being unloaded to future owners.
Jesse
I can understand continuing to breed a dog that is clear but has produced dysplasia in his pups. Avoid a repeat breeding and see if the next litter has clears. I got that.
I can understand breeding a dog with dysplasia to a dog with a much better rating. It sounds like a test breeding to me. But until the pups produced have shown that the dysplasia has been reduced, I don't understand doing another breeding even if with a different mate.
I can kinda understand breeding a dog before his hips are known. Someone has determined that he's going to be used regardless of the results. Kinda like the test breeding. But then that someone has changed their minds that now it is important before evaluating the pups?
Basically, why the hurry in deciding what to do with the dog before it's known how the pups are turning out?
Jesse
As a species-wide questions, not a Shogun-specific question, what is the general "weight" given to the different breeding traits? It seems Shikoku are at critically small numbers, so, if anything, health and joints should be the primary factors, with coat (aka "show" factor) being lower on the list of importance.
Also, is it not a major point in "ethical breeding" to get the hips and joints checked prior to breeding?
To further reinforce, these questions come from doing personal research on the breed as part of being a responsible potential customer of the kennels that breed these dogs, not to instigate.
I haven't done enough reading on genetics, as you have, to be able to full weigh in on the ease of selection for coat aka quality vs health. However, it's my opinion that its more ethical to begin with a healthy dog first and foremost, and then pursue refinement of the coat and "quality. Instead of starting with a fantastic coat/quality, but with messed up physiques and joints.
There may be a system set up that prioritizes coats, just as there is an established system in agriculture (my field of study), but it's not hard to know that it's not the best method for the modern day. Especially with so few dogs.
It sucks too because she charges an arm, a leg, your left nut (if you have one), and a chunk of your soul for a pup. For that price the Shikoku pup should have impeccable health and must crap out gold!
I know very little about hip dysplasia in dogs. I was wondering if anyone can put into context the likelihood that my little Jack will experience problems. He is a pet and I'm not planning on breeding. All I care about is that he is able to have a long and active life. Apparently Kimi, his dam, is just fine. If anyone could reference threads or useful articles on the subject, I would be very appreciative.
Thanks.
eta, the reason why I bring up neuter is because the cost of x-ray is a lot cheaper since he'd be out anyways. If he is already neutered or don't plan to, then you can just get the x-rays done on their own though it will be a bit more pricey.
I am 100% for the improvement and continuation of breed specific traits to maintain what a Nihon Ken is, and to not just have a pretty looking mutt.
However, it's a fallacy to set exactness of coat at the highest tier of breed "quality".
If, to use your situation as an example due to running a breeding program, you would want to maintain 100% breed traits then it would be legitimate to breed your dogs to be stand-off'ish, confrontational, and more defensive than they are. That's a major trait of the traditional temperament of the NK breeds, mostly due to their historic treatment as tools or livestock (who in today's ethics would be considered neglected), rather than family members.
It's only recently that dogs in Japan are beginning to be considered parts of the family, rather than outdoor animals. The breeding of "family friendly" NK is a Western trait selection in the breed, and a violation of their traditional "quality". Therefore, it's even more reason to be breeding for a healthy foundation, and selecting coat/"quality" from there. Your pups who happen to have a white spot on their necks are no less Akita Inus than your pups with Standard-perfect coats.
As in the JA, Shikoku who are bred for health and have some coat deviation would make the breeders no less money, and in a few generations of reselecting for coat then it wouldn't be much of a title loss... as if it's hard to gain titles in dog showing nowadays anyways. It's become a matter of perseverance and point accumulation, rather than single judgements that have any heft to them.
@twobirds since he's not a small breed dog, I'd recommend radiographs at 2 years since he'll be fully bone/growth mature by then. That's the figure used in the handful of veterinary practices I've worked at. I also got Tsune, my previous Shiba, neutered at a low cost neuter/spay practice that had a new, state of the art neuter-mobile with full general anesthesia. Overall it was $75, $60 for the neuter, $15 for donation + meds. Then you could just stash the full cost neuter money for the x-rays.
@Hinata23 For real! That's why I'm looking at importing Hokka/Shikoku instead of purchasing one in the US.
And the co-owner was @Edgewood.
I really don't believe the people involved would be swayed by that one trait.
More likely, I would believe that they hoped he would be an outcross that would help get away from the other health issues already in the U.S. Reproductive issues, in particular.
To put emphasis back on the main concern, the main critique and questioning was over breeding him before the 1.5 - 2 year x-rays and without joint certifying. Thereby passing on the joint issues without even knowing they existed in the first place, which doesn't qualify as "Better Breeding Practices".
Only some vets are qualified to do the normal health certifications. I would check with your current vet and let them know the situation. Some vets, though they will send you to another vet for the evaluation, can give you small pointers on what to look out for and things to do (we had this recently since a half sibling out of the same sire developed glaucoma; my breeder does a gonioscopy but I'm still paranoid).
Best thing to do is to speak with both your vet and breeder. See if you can get a record of the hip evaluation from your breeder. A good vet will let you know what they think the risk factor may be and how you should proceed in terms of evaluation/prevention.
Breeding it out of the population like that, however, is a bit of an exaggeration. Two generations or so to reinforce joint health, or eliminating rear dew claws, doesn't sound like a Standard Doomsday. Especially when that healthy base would, by necessity, be bred to an unrelated partner. A wholesale "There's no rules! Forget the Standard completely!" would be just as irresponsible, and I agree wholeheartedly.
Anyhow, it just seems Shogun was bred for less than honorable purposes, perhaps to recoup import cost, and it was, unfortunately, never clarified. The more I research US Shikoku breeding ops the more unscrupulous at worst, or irresponsible at best, it seems. Not to alarm any new Shikoku owners, because each dog is a blessing and regardless of any issues will certainly bring joy to the owner's life. I just had higher expectations after reading the mission of the NASC + the purchasing fees equivalent to the dog's weight in gold, in relation to the health states of quite a few of these pups.
Lets say there are only two traits which define a dog -- good/bad coat and good/bad hips. Obviously a dog with bad coat and bad hips is right out of the question and is culled immediately. Likewise, if dogs exist which have both good coat and good hips, then they are the obvious breeding choice above all others. So lets look at the other two possibilities instead.
My assumption for this little theoretical situation was that we were considering dogs with good coat with bad hips versus bad coat with good hips. If you cull the dogs with good coat and bad hips, then good coat is gone forever. It is not an exaggeration, it is not after a large number of generations. You have limited your breeding population to only dogs with bad coat and good hips, and the ONLY way to get that good coat back into the population is to breed to one of those bad-hipped dogs you previously culled.
If you breed your good coat with bad hips dog to a bad coat with good hips dog you run the risk of getting bad coat with bad hips -- but you also have a chance to get good coat with good hips, something which previously did not exist in this theoretical population.