Breeding hounds for working. Question.

I just recently moved to oklahoma and know a treeing walker coonhound breeder. I also know a black and tan coonhound breeder in Tennessee.

These dogs are all bred for the sole purpose of hunting. Is it normal to not heath test these animals? Or breed to any standard? Seems like the norm around here.

[mom2dogs]

Originally Posted by Reggin

These dogs are all bred for the sole purpose of hunting. Is it normal to not heath test these animals? Or breed to any standard? Seems like the norm around here.

Though I strongly believe in health testing, I don't disagree always. The breeders *I* have heard of, do not health test but they aren't stupid, an unhealthy dog or one that isn't put together right won't work properly and they don't want to reproduce a dog who breaks down or has to be retired at an early age. They seem to breed to their "own" standard, and it works for them.

As an example (not hunting related tho): I met a breeder of BCs who bred mostly for herding (I say mostly because of course he wanted good dogs mentally and physically). . . no health testing, no registration, yet their dogs were by far the best dogs I've seen. Same with a Stabij breeder, who he bred to help around his farm, looks were the last thing on his mind - just a dog who could do the work he required. Though he did let me know that he did prefer a solid black head

[OutlineACDs]

I think all breeders should health test. Just because a dog will work does not mean it is healthy.

If you don't test, you don't know. Period.

If you have the testing available to you, (which its available to everyone) you should be using it.

[mrose_s]

I've seen this a lot with working herding breeders here. Looking at kelpie breeders and so far I've only found one that did any health screening, and that was hips. There is only 1 really significant health issue with kelpies and that is PRA, so why not be testing eyes?
I've read a lot that its only the bench kelpies that it is really common in but if the working breeders arn't testing, how can we be sure nothing underlying is being carried through their lines?

I don't know if I'll find a breeder that does testing + everything else I want. So far the breeder I'm most happy with doesn't health test and they do produce a lot of litters, but this seems the norm aswell. There is demand for good working dogs and people will buy them if people are breeding them. Yet, so many that arn't up to par land in shelters. The thing that is drawing me to this breeder is that they do breed for temperment aswell as working ability. I've talked a lot of people and there are some studs out there that, while they are producing amazing working dogs, are mainly focussing on that one point.
This is about 70% of the reason I won't be getting a kelpie as my next dog, finding a decent Kelpie breeder seems harder than finding a decent BC breeder.

[SpringerLover]

I just had the best discussion ever with one of my neighbors. Two of our three neighbors have hounds. One has "just hounds" that are "good working dogs" and the other has health tested, purebred hounds. The one with purebred hounds is my favorite, and not because I am a purebred dog snob, by any means. He used to buy "good working dogs" but as such, there is never a guarantee. He found a breeder who breeds purebred walker coon hounds and health tests ALL of his dogs. So much so that he requires the dog be brought back to him at two, xrayed by his vet, and if it doesn't pass OFA, the dog is altered and the owner given a refund.

Yes, my eyes popped out of my head too. No joke, as he wouldn't know where to begin making this up.

There are some good hound breeders who health test.

The point of them being purebred is that now the dogs are permanently able to be tracked. My neighbor also found out that breeding two great hounds does not produce all great puppies, hahaha. Really good guy. I'd get a hound from him, if I was into hounds!

[mom2dogs]

I think I should also mention that the two breeders above who I mentioned are farmers who aren't looking to improve the overall breed (ZOMG I know how awful ) but to improve their line and what they want from their working dogs. I think simply put they breed for themselves, not for the future of the breed, and not for anyone else. Selfish? Maybe. But once they die, their lines die with them. The vast majority of their puppies go to friends, family, and the neighbor's farm. Because the general public do not know of these breeders, one doesn't have internet but the one thing they both have in common is they don't advertise (LOL, I don't even know if they have a kennel name, and they certainly don't have a fancy registered name like my dogs).

Just saying, every situation is different. I wouldn't hesitate to go back to Holland and ask to get a puppy from either.

Originally Posted by OutlineACDs

Just because a dog will work does not mean it is healthy.

I think this is true to an extent. An unhealthy/unsound dog won't continue to work hard until 8-9 years old either (these are dogs that work all day long, 7 days a week) and won't do it without be physically and mentally able to do so. Bottom line is - these dogs actually prove themselves with hard labor day in and day out, and IMO, that is sometimes more important (again, hard core advocate of health testing, but I think in some situations, it's not the be all end all).

[JennSLK]

Originally Posted by mom2dogs

I think I should also mention that the two breeders above who I mentioned are farmers who aren't looking to improve the overall breed (ZOMG I know how awful ) but to improve their line and what they want from their working dogs. I think simply put they breed for themselves, not for the future of the breed, and not for anyone else. Selfish? Maybe. But once they die, their lines die with them. The vast majority of their puppies go to friends, family, and the neighbor's farm. Because the general public do not know of these breeders, one doesn't have internet but the one thing they both have in common is they don't advertise (LOL, I don't even know if they have a kennel name, and they certainly don't have a fancy registered name like my dogs).

Just saying, every situation is different. I wouldn't hesitate to go back to Holland and ask to get a puppy from either.



I think this is true to an extent. An unhealthy/unsound dog won't continue to work hard until 8-9 years old either (these are dogs that work all day long, 7 days a week) and won't do it without be physically and mentally able to do so. Bottom line is - these dogs actually prove themselves with hard labor day in and day out, and IMO, that is sometimes more important (again, hard core advocate of health testing, but I think in some situations, it's not the be all end all).

I agree with that. The breeders I have delt with have dogs that are 10 working every day. Or almost every day. You have to look at your lines, how old the dogs in the pedigree were when they stoped working and why

Thanks for the opinions, guys. Just something I've noticed so figured I would ask. The walker breeder I know has some pretty OLD dogs who still hunt.

[OutlineACDs]

Originally Posted by Reggin

Thanks for the opinions, guys. Just something I've noticed so figured I would ask. The walker breeder I know has some pretty OLD dogs who still hunt.

And hunting is different than herding. Those dogs may hunt 6 weekends out of the year. Not very hard for a dysplastic dog to go out and hunt for 4-6 hours then have the next few days off. They don't have a flock to tend to etc. I still think that testing is important. I know plenty of dogs who will work through injury. At the end of a hard day, they will be limping a bit, but are back at it the next day.

[JennSLK]

Most B&T breeders I know that are STRICTLY hunting do not test.