[KRL]

If you feel our breed wouldn't be better off do you feel it would be better off in the future not breeding carriers?

We will leave this to the dicussion area. Or we can start another poll. I am curious if people feel that not breeding the great dogs who were carriers in the past would but us better or worse off or the same.

 

[KRL]

I put three options in but for some reason the option of "the same" doesn't show up. I am new to polls.

 

[Robert S. Libberton]

It would be better off if we tabled this discussion for the 3 or so already in progress.

http://retrievertraining.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=25963
http://retrievertraining.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=26825
http://retrievertraining.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=24552

 

[KRL]

THose are different! QUite a bit different. I knew those were going on but this is a differnet twist and differnet question.

 

[Cray Stephenson]

What is "Better"?

Better Health

Better performance

Better.....?


I think that now there is a test for it, we can make better educated decisions and hopefully do a better job of controlling if not eradicating it....while still maintaining performance

 

[Henry V]

We have absolutely no way of knowing. Maybe yes, maybe no.

What if they were bred and only their clear progeny campaigned and bred. What would the answer be then? Again, we do not know.

Maybe if there was a test 20+ years ago, some of the progeny of these dogs that were non-carriers would have gone to competitive homes instead of the carriers. Maybe the brothers and sisters of these great dogs would have also been succesful and their lines would continue today. We just do not know.

 

[Lisa S.]

We have absolutely no way of knowing. Maybe yes, maybe no.

I agree.
As far as health is concerned it may have come out the same.

 

[KRL]

Better performance. I should have clarified that.

It is tough to argue better healthwise but now that it is preventable maybe healthwise from now forward it is a wash. Before the test the lab breed was worse off healthwise because of myopathy. Now I say since it is controllable and it is a non issue health wise.

It is hard to weigh health issues vs. performance issues and what are most important. It is a balance. THe perfect specimen in both aspects does not exist and will never exist. It is a balance between maximizing the positives and minimizing the negatives.

My opinion is CNM is just another negative that needs to be weighed against the positives.

Since hip dysplaysia is not controllable and we don't know the mode of interitance and have not isolated a gene, that characteristic is different. SO is EIC until there is a test developed and many other characteristics. Having a test for Myopathy really changed the playing field. I truely feel if you wanted to eliminate all health issues from the breed you would do it more of a disservice than a service (ONLY OPINION). If you want to minimize the health issues and maximize the peformance you are doing good for the breed (IN MY OPININON, I CAN'T BACK IT WITH FACTS). Culling some animals from the breeding program is not bad. Maybe culling all CNM carriers is best for the breed. I don't know. My gut feel is erring on the side of not culling them all or at least not right away seems like the better bet. Who knows? It is just an opinion.

 

[Bill Watson]

In spite of what the ACLU belives I personally believe God is looking out for ALL his creatures and we were not destined to be all knowing. Some things will not be reveled to us and we may not be privileged to all of His decisions.

I often wonder why I have been so lucky all these years. Give it a thought in your own case. Just my own personal out look on my own life. Bill
________
Zoloft Lawyer

 

[badbullgator]

Better performance yes.
Would breed a carrier regards.