The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 10 of 14 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 139

Thread: Will the EIC ignorance have a major negative impact?

  1. #91
    Senior Member Franco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Lafayette, La.
    Posts
    10,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EdA View Post
    JJ is a dumbass Arkansas hillbilly snake oil salesman who knows how to make money but who is unaware of his own deficiencies including the ability to complete an intelligible sentence, send him a bottle of moonshine, that's his style face lift notwithstanding.
    Funny!

    Maybe with that moonshine, I should attach a note suggesting Ken Norton Jr as DC if not HC with the Boys.
    It's time we abandon our party affiliations and rather than being good Dems or good Repubs we all become good Americans. MJH345

  2. #92
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    698

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EdA View Post
    Go watch your really good football team with 2 coaches dumbass JJ let get away! Go Saints!
    Saints are over rated, we saw that when the HAWKS SMASHED em'!!!

    I often, hear, even in this thread "British labs" are better built and therefore don't experience as many orthopedic injuries, especially cruciate's. From the mouth of one of the elite K-9 orthopedic surgeons in the world said "BS, I have labs of all styles, ie. British, American, show, etc and they are all in here having TPLO surgeries." He went on to say that American retriever field trials are the most physically demanding of all k9 games in the world. He told me of a prominent family that imported a "British" lab to trial because they didnt have orthopedic issues (so they thought). The gentelman made an all age dog but in pre-national training one year the dog tore its cruciate. There isn't a lot of "British" labs running American field trials so who really knows if that statement holds any water?? When I asked this particular ortho. surgeon why is the lab susceptible to the cruciate injury he said " labs have a small breeding pool." My first thought was how could that be when the Labrador is the most popular breed of the AKC? Think about how many of all those labs are being bred? The reality is there are only so many studs being bred to. Of course the backyard breeders breed to whoever and don't know what EIC or CNM is, so take them out of the equation. As far as registered dogs, amd especially competitive labs in reality do have a small breeding pool, Then to think breeders are going to make the pool that much smaller by only breeding clear to clear. The only reason I can think of that would propenciate that kind breeding "protocol," is marketability. So is "marketibility" improving the breed or their estate?
    Last edited by jeff evans; 12-15-2013 at 04:10 PM.
    "Women are like labradors...,they all have their quarks."~Phil Robertson

  3. #93
    Member mathewrodriguez's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Conroe, Texas
    Posts
    83

    Default

    Incidents of ACL, MCL, LCL & PCL injuries in physically demanding sports such as football are significantly greater than those in less demanding sports. Likewise, the percentage of soft tissue knee injuries sigficantly increases from high school to college level, and then again from college to pro level. Common sense would suggest that the higher percentage of CCL injuries in retrievers is a direct correlation to the sports we play with our "best friends" rather than a small breeding pool.
    Last edited by mathewrodriguez; 12-15-2013 at 09:22 PM.
    Matt Rodriguez

    "The will to win is nothing without the will to prepare."

  4. #94
    Senior Member Breck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Elverson, PA
    Posts
    2,432

    Default

    Jeff Evans
    Sorry, but in at least the past 50 years a British dog has never even placed in an all-age field trial, let alone win and no way qualified there for has never been in a position to tear a ccl in pre national training.
    Nice try though.
    "Darla" AFC Candlewoods Lil Smokin Tequila (2002-2013)(fondly remembered)
    "Smoke" Smokin Auggies Menace, QAA (2003- )(retired nut case, ask Rando)
    "Simba" Humewood Simba (1999-2014)(my 1st dog)

    .
    Per favore, non mi rompere i coglioni.
    Grazie




  5. #95
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    7,105

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by john fallon View Post
    That is a good site with a lot of potential, but it needs more imput from without to reach its maximum...

    At this point in time I would not put much stock in the K9data.com's figure of 11.04 being the actual COI percentage rate for our subset of Labradors ...

    I spent my lunch hour on that site looking for the COI's of the National Open qualifyers; I'll admit that I did not spend the entire hour looking,I took the time to eat my lunch. But guess what I found while I was looking ? None had been computed as yet.

    What I was told by a prompt for those that I found which were entered in the data base at all, was to check back in a few weeks...

    This leads me to believe that many were not included in the equation

    john
    I would agree with you, John. There are many fewer Labs in the database than Goldens, so it could be inaccurate to compare the breed COIs from two such dramatically different size groups.

    The COIs for k9data are run approximately the first of each month, but the nature of the process can take several days if the COI run gets interrupted on the server that does the job. If you look at the "change history", it will show you when a dog was entered in the database. So, if a dog was entered on Dec. 8, the COI probably missed the December run and won't show up until the COIs are run again at the beginning of January.

    The Lab database was started much more recently than the Golden database (which probably began around 2000). Golden people grabbed onto it quickly, and many people spent many hours inputting pedigrees from all kinds of sources: the OFA database, the AKC database, show catalogs, field trial catalogs, specialty catalogs, GRCA Yearbooks. Also, some people who already had info in their private database programs "dumped" into k9data as well, so the database grew very rapidly.

    Lab owners have other databases that they use, so k9data may, or may not, become as heavily used for Labs. Once you get enough dogs in there remarkable things happen. When I first used the db back at the beginning, I did not have info beyond 5 generations on a particular pedigree. As more people filled in the blanks over time, that pedigree now goes back further on k9data.
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  6. #96
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    7,105

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Franco View Post


    Again, as I wrote in my first post on this thread, quality breeders are not trying to improve the breed. Thay are trying to maintain the breed's integrity. Not change it by what they call "improving". It may improve the breed for FT's but ceratinly not in general. That is true of all breeders that breed for a "speciality" whether it be Field or Bench. They will overlook issues in hopes of producing that speaciality winner to win at their extreme sport. And, like I said earlier in this thread, if FT are your game, then buy a clear or carrier, if you think that is what it takes. But, don't pass it off under the guise of improving a breed that has its origins as a hunting retriever and needs no "improvement" as stated by what constitutes a Lab under the AKC. If anything, breeders should be working to maintain The Standard and the integrity of The Standard of the Labrador Retriever!
    Franco, maybe it's just semantics or limiting the concept to any one special venue the retrievers participate in?

    Regardless of venue, genetic diversity that promotes soundness in each specialty subset becomes part of the larger whole. When you follow back on even the most nondescript BYB pedigree you will usually end up finding some familiar names that competed in some venue. While breeders have become more conscious of this over time, there will always be some pups who get bred that were never sold as "breeding stock".

    So, everything any breeder does that preserves soundness of mind and body, including maintaining genetic diversity, can be said to be "improving" the breed as a whole. If each subset works in that direction, if we should ever find ourselves "in a box" in any one venue, and feel compelled to use stock from another venue to overcome some genetic problem, we will have a better chance at preservation of the qualities pertinent to our preferred venue.

    Are there some breeders, even several, in ANY breed that may "overlook" issues that should not be overlooked? Is the sky blue? Dog breeders are not immune to the universal failings that afflict the human species.

    Is the FT retriever the epitome of what a functioning retriever should be? I would say yes. While the tests that prove their mettle may be far beyond what the average hunter would fully utilize ... most of the hunt test dogs came from those same FT lines. Most of the good hunting dogs came from those same lines. I've rarely (if ever) heard of an accomplished FT retriever that was not also good at the hunt test game or as a hunting dog. There may be some, but I simply haven't heard anyone complain that their FT dog can't hunt.

    The FT retrievers simply have a preponderance of those qualities needed for their original function: intelligence, confidence, instincts, functional conformation. While one might argue that some FT retrievers do not meet the Standard of the Breed, overall their bodies hold up over years of rigorous physical challenge. The FT and hunt test venues are the closest to the original intention for these breeds to assess the dogs' capability for their intended purpose. I'd wager that most (if not all) field-tested retrievers could do just fine in any other performance venue. That may be why so many obedience and agility enthusiasts have come to seek out dogs who have field ancestry for those venues. The only venue that is less likely to look for field ancestry is the show venue where it is easier to get side-tracked away from the traits that are closely related to the breeds' original purpose. Performance venues rely heavily on the same traits that make the retrievers good field performers.

    So, while not everyone needs a retriever as highly trained as the FT dogs, many of them need the same innate qualities that make those dogs good field performers.

    I think that breeders certainly have made advances in physical soundness, i.e. health issues. On other threads, the question remains whether today's dogs are "improved" in other qualities over some of their ancestors. Training methods and types of tests have changed, but those great dogs from the past are the ones who gave their genes to today's dogs. With the benefit of today's training knowledge and techniques maybe they could hold their own.
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  7. #97
    Senior Member hotel4dogs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    SW of Chicago, IL
    Posts
    2,400

    Default

    One of the real problems with eliminating carriers of any disease (including PRA, EIC, ichthyosis, whatever) is that there are so many other diseases for which there is no DNA test, but there may be one soon.
    Theoretically speaking, suppose we eliminate the 60% of the Goldens who are either ichthyosis affected or ichthyosis carriers from the gene pool. We now have only 40% of our breeding stock left.
    Now supposing in the next few years we develop a DNA test for the big killers of the Goldens, hemangiosarcoma, lymphoma, and osteosarcoma. What happens if we now find that over 50% of the dogs who were kept in the breeding pool because they were ichthyosis clear (a generally mild disease) are carriers/affecteds for the cancers that kill about 65%of all goldens? We end up with a very limited gene pool for sure. And suppose we then find a gene that relates to ACL and CCL injuries. Do we elimate all of those carriers, too?
    We need to use intelligent, informed breeding to keep the maximum number of quality dogs in the gene pool.

    Barb Gibson
    with
    CH Rosewood Little Giant UDX VER RA MHU SH MXP MJP XFP T2BP DJ VCX WCX CCA CGC FFX-OG
    also UCH HR UUD UJJ URO1 UHIT
    (golden retriever) born 3-10-07
    a.k.a. "Tito", "The Tito Monster"
    www.GoTeamTito.com

  8. #98
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    698

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Breck View Post
    Jeff Evans
    Sorry, but in at least the past 50 years a British dog has never even placed in an all-age field trial, let alone win and no way qualified there for has never been in a position to tear a ccl in pre national training.
    Nice try though.
    Wow! You have a vast knowledge of pedigrees, more than anyone I have had the pleasure to talk dogs with. It's very possible he used the words "imported." and I assumed British? Dunno, but can assure you that's what the man said and I trust his knowledge. Where would you get the information going back 50yrs to say with such certainty? Not questioning you, I ask with sincere interest?
    "Women are like labradors...,they all have their quarks."~Phil Robertson

  9. #99
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    845

    Default

    Good posts EdA and G. Clinchy. After my 37 years of FT dogs my advice to you newbies is listen to the oldies who have struggled thru pre-DNA fights. Learn your genetics and do not always breed to the hot dog of the year. Breeding is both an art and science. Learn both.

  10. #100
    Senior Member Wade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    1,263

    Default

    Maybe so Ed, but he is one rich son of a BI@#$. LOL!!!

    P. S. Glad that you and the dogs made it home OK from Sodak. I'm guessing we drove right past one another in Mitchell, worst driving conditions I have ever experienced.


    Quote Originally Posted by EdA View Post
    JJ is a dumbass Arkansas hillbilly snake oil salesman who knows how to make money but who is unaware of his own deficiencies including the ability to complete an intelligible sentence, send him a bottle of moonshine, that's his style face lift notwithstanding.
    I hate rude behavior in a man, won't tolerate it. Captain Woodrow Call

Posting Permissions

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