Collie that won Westminster is son of double merle

[Saeleofu]

One of the common side affects of the mismate shot is that it causes their body to reject their own bone marrow. Most vets refuse to administer it for more than one accidental mating in the dog's lifetime because the risk to the bitch is so high. Also, doing a spay abort is substantially more risky than a normal spay. The repro vet my dog's breeder uses had to do a C-section on one of her bitches because her uterine horn ruptured and went septic. Even that vet said that if it had been a normal C-section and there was no rupture or infection she would have preferred to let the dog heal up and recover from the pregnancy with all her parts intact before doing a spay.

My vet doesn't use the mismate shot EVER. If we do a medical abortion it's similar to treating pyo medically. I can't remember exactly what the differences are, but I know last time we did it the bitch was hospitalized for a week and it a ROUGH on her.

I personally would prefer death to being deaf and blind.

That's YOUR choice, not the choice of everyone else. I would totally take being deaf blind over death ANY day. I know a lot of people that are deaf, blind, or BOTH. And they get along just fine. A dog should be able to get along ever better than a human, considering their main sense is SMELL. Smell to a dog is like sight to a human.

It's sad how someone can be so intolerable of defects.

[Fran101]

I have heard both sides and every excuse in the book but frankly, I think it's inexcusable and extremely selfish to knowingly do a merle x merle breeding.

even if only one pup is born deaf, or only two born blind out of the whole litter.. you would KNOWINGLY take that risk and deal with euthanizing or finding homes (and proper homes for deaf/blind dogs aren't exactly a dime a dozen) for deaf/blind pups in the name of..what?.. titles?

Any breeder that isn't at it's root breeding for the HEALTH and perseverance of their breed (including creating healthy pups to further the breed) needs to really re-examine their priorities.

[Kat09Tails]

Personally I'm of the opinion there isn't really a good reason to produce a 1/4 chance that a puppy really should be euthanized within a litter. If someone produced dogs where one out of four would be born with crippling HD, a fatal heart defect, or a serious case of epilepsy people would be howling. Why would a blind/deaf collie ever be acceptable within a breed bred for herding? After all the well being of every dog within a pedigree should matter. Vanity - is the only reason to produce such an animal on purpose - and foolishness would be the only reason to retain one as breeding stock.

The UK kennel club will no longer register puppies that result from a sheltie merle merle crossing and I believe it is the right thing to do. It was the result of a request from the breed specialty club.

[Romy]

I think that even if someone is heartless and views dogs as expendable livestock, and is okay with greatly increasing the possibility of having to cull puppies, it's still a very stupid decision.

With all the expense of health tests, titling, working, dog food, vet bills, physical toll of pregnancy on a bitch, etc. why on earth would anybody want to risk their best prospect out of the litter being born with a lifelong sensory impairment, which could very easily prevent them from being able to work or be proven in whatever capacity they use their dogs?

It makes no sense to me.

And from an emotional standpoint, it just makes me sad that people do it intentionally when so many of them aren't willing to buck up and be responsible for the dogs they bring into the world.

[Spiritwind]

Originally Posted by cliffdog

I understand not wanting to spay/abort the bitch, but when you make a mistake, you take responsibility for it. Better for the collie world to lose a great brood bitch than for a litter of blind, deaf puppies to be brought into this world only to suffer. I mean were not talking about a litter of mutts here, which could be found good homes and live long, happy lives. Were taking about pups with serious, life-ruining disabilities.

I honestly don't know if I would be willing to spay my bitch because of something like this. Though, I don't know what I would really do if I was in this situation, since I've never had to deal with this. Especially if it wasn't even my fault (like it happened while the dog was with the handler -- which is what did happen). Just because two dogs may have bred (accidentally) doesn't guarantee puppies, especially if you didn't actually witness the breeding and I THINK I'd probably have a real hard time taking that bitch in to be spayed right away before anyone could even verify she was pregnant.

I personally love merles, especially the blues.. thouh I have one blue and one sable merle.

[Lilavati]

I haven't read the whole thread, but I keep thinking there's a very simple solution to deliberate merle X merle breedings, if only the AKC or the breed club would do it . . . any offspring of such a mating has a pet registration. Period. It's pups can't be registered.

Although there might still be accidental merle X merle breedings, it would put an end to people doing it on purpose.

Of course, that would require that the AKC do something . . .


As for spaying a bitch after such a breeding . . . I don't see a reason why one should be obliged to abort the whole litter, killing healthy puppies as well and lose the brood bitch. As much as I think the puppies from such a breeding should be only registrable as pets . . . I'll probably be flamed for this, but I think I'd just put down any double merles shortly after birth rather than kill the whole litter. It would be just as a merciful as an abort and saves the rest of the litter and the bitch's breeding capacity.

[OutlineACDs]

Originally Posted by Romy

Merle/merle puppies aren't suffering horribly when they're born. Not any more than any other puppy, when you consider ALL dogs are blind and deaf at birth.

If a puppy turns out to have a major impairment and you're not equipped to care for them, then you need to do the right thing and let them go in a humane manner.

And glad to know you think blindness and deafness are serious, life ruining disabilities. Dogs don't rely on vision as heavily as humans do, and PLENTY of human go on to live happy fulfilling lives devoid of sight or sound. I know of one double merle dog that has no eyes and he is extremely happy, loving, and stable. He actually works as a therapy dog in a hospital for children with "serious, life ruining disabilities", showing them that it's possible to have a full and happy life even if your body doesn't fully function.

Excellent post, Romy.

I personally don't advocate the breeding of merle to merle, but I know it's done.

Knew of a sheltie breeeder who had a double dilute (merlexmerle) stud for quite a while.

I knew an aussie breeder who did merle x merle breeding on a semi-regular basis. She claimed to be able to be able to do extensive pedigree research and do breedings that didn't result in double dilutes. Now, did she have them PTS at birth and that was a bunch of bull? I don't know. I do know I've seen a few perfectly healthy, correct dogs come out of her merle x merle breedings. She wasn't the only aussie person doing this, as supposedly her and about 3 others were doing this pedigree research and breeding dogs.

The big "scary" danger to collie/sheltie people is the controversy with color-headed whites. The argument is that you can't tell the difference between a color-headed white and a healthy double dilute. So a novice breeder could breed a sable or tri color-headed white to a merle a have a whole litter of double dilutes. The issue here being that the dog they thought was a color headed white is really a dilute. IMO that person shouldn't be breeding anyway because all it takes is a little pedigree research to see that its obviously not a color headed white.

The sable-merle is also a result of "duh" why didn't you know more about your dog?! As (I think) Romy said perviously sable merle is obvious at birth. It doesn't take a genious to see that if a sable dog has ANY blue in it's eyes it's a sable merle. Also, I'd just assume any sable puppy out of a merle x sable breeding carries the merle gene.

There were a lot of false statments in those articles and a lot of hype. Doesn't make breeding to get double dilutes right, but the offspring of a double dilute should be healthy as long as the health clearances are done. I know the dogs can't be CERF'ed, but the genetic tests can be done and hips/elbows etc.

[OutlineACDs]

Originally Posted by Lilavati

I haven't read the whole thread, but I keep thinking there's a very simple solution to deliberate merle X merle breedings, if only the AKC or the breed club would do it . . . any offspring of such a mating has a pet registration. Period. It's pups can't be registered.

Although there might still be accidental merle X merle breedings, it would put an end to people doing it on purpose.

Of course, that would require that the AKC do something . . .

It is not AKC's job to police anyone. They are a registry. As a puppy buyer you hold the power. If you don't support it, don't buy from that breeder. Asking the AKC to get involved is like having the government getting involved in our rights to birth control (which they're trying to do). It's none of their business how/why/when we breed our dogs.

Always, always support breeders who you believe in and who have the ethics and principles that you can agree on.

[OutlineACDs]

Originally Posted by Romy

I think that even if someone is heartless and views dogs as expendable livestock, and is okay with greatly increasing the possibility of having to cull puppies, it's still a very stupid decision.

With all the expense of health tests, titling, working, dog food, vet bills, physical toll of pregnancy on a bitch, etc. why on earth would anybody want to risk their best prospect out of the litter being born with a lifelong sensory impairment, which could very easily prevent them from being able to work or be proven in whatever capacity they use their dogs?

It makes no sense to me.

And from an emotional standpoint, it just makes me sad that people do it intentionally when so many of them aren't willing to buck up and be responsible for the dogs they bring into the world.

I'm always playing the devil's advocate on these things it seems. :P

The more chance there is of stubbing your toe, the more chance you have of stepping into success. ~Author Unknown

Everyone takes risks in breeding. You risk losing your bitch, you risk having a health problem crop up, you risk losing your entire litter, you risk producing puppies with horrible temperaments. It's all a risk and some people are only comfortable in taking small risks.

No one on this board would be discussing this double dilute dog had his offspring not been a top winning dog who has done well at a huge, televised show.

The breeder took a big risk and bred to a non-CERF'ed non-shown dog and got something worthwhile. Why knock this dog because of his father?

Why not breed to a non-tested farm dog because he compliments your bitch well and has working ability?

It's all about the risks you're willing to take.

(again, just playing devil's advocate)

[Aleron]

Good post Romy.

Originally Posted by cliffdog

Just what I would do. I don't believe in bringing deformities into the world.
Fortunately for me I don't fancy any breeds in which Merle occurs with the exception of corgis, and I have no intention of owning a Merle, or at least not an intact one. Too dangerous a gene for me to want to handle.

Do you realize that corgis are all "deformed"?

"The genetic mutation that gives the Cardigan its very short legs is called achondroplasia. That’s a word that basically means “weird cartilage.” The growth plates and other cartilaginous structures in this breed are thin and brittle and age quickly, shutting down prematurely. That’s why the bones of the legs do not grow long, and why they are generally at least a little twisted.

Another universal effect of achondroplasia is a hip socket that is wide and shallow and rather square-shaped instead of deep and egg-shaped. The heads of the femurs are similarly broad and short and square.

What this means in real life is that ALL Cardigans have some degree of what we’d call hip dysplasia. Their hips just don’t fit as deeply and closely as in the long-legged breeds. And many – probably a third or more – will have hips that are so loose that they will fail OFA certification.

The very, very good news is that in Cardigans there’s very little correlation between those looser hips and pain and disability. As an orthopedic surgeon once said to me, “They’ve got bizarre hips but they seem to get along perfectly well on those bizarre hips.” So your puppy will almost certainly have no issues even if his or her hips are looser than average for the breed.
...

The issue of spines is a similar one. Dwarfed dogs have cartilage that ages more quickly and becomes brittle and can crack or herniate. Thankfully the rate of disc injuries (often called “going down in the back” or just “going down” in these breeds) is a lot lower in this breed than in, say, Dachshunds, but it can and does happen as they approach middle age. Plenty of people never have a Cardigan go down, through decades of ownership, but it would be wrong of me to imply that it could never happen."

http://blacksheepcardigans.com/why-w...ips-and-spine/