New Puppies

by **Karen** » January 6th, 2009, 11:45 am

mnp13 wrote:Who's your pregnant female?

Dilly.

by **SisMorphine** » January 6th, 2009, 12:21 pm

Ooooh I didn't know we had even MORE puppies on the board!! Jeez, I thought that spring was when animals were supposed to get all horny, not winter

So tell us a story! Dad? What are you breeding for? Do you know how many are in there yet? I can't wait for puppy pics!

by **pitbullmamaliz** » January 6th, 2009, 12:40 pm

But let's start it in a new topic, eh? :wink:

by **Karen** » January 6th, 2009, 1:03 pm

SisMorphine wrote:Ooooh I didn't know we had even MORE puppies on the board!! Jeez, I thought that spring was when animals were supposed to get all horny, not winter

So tell us a story! Dad? What are you breeding for? Do you know how many are in there yet? I can't wait for puppy pics!

Things happen for a reason right? Daddy is Rowdy who is over 2 a CH and has his UWP. He and Laura are also probably going to Premier in weight pull, they finished 8th in region 1& they've been working on the control aspect in obedience class so we'll see.

This was not a planned litter in any way shape or form except for THE DOG. Day after Thanksgiving we had Rowdy in our bathroom in a 2 latch wire crate with the door to the bathroom plus the door to the master walk in closet shut and latched. They had been fine all Thanksgiving day and face it, Rowdy's usually out in the hall or kitchen crated so just 1 door separates them so who knew?

I was gone for 4 hours and we came home to them sharing after party drinks and my bedroom was a wreck. Dilly had opened 2 doors and helped Rowdy pop the crate door somehow. I was literally throwing up and called Ruth crying because of this. Neither is health tested and in fact Rowdy's neuter was scheduled for the following Tuesday. I wasn't breeding either dog so why health test? Yeah. Right.

After talking to Ruth and having all weekend to get in contact with the folks who kept saying "if Dilly ever had puppies....." and finding out that 4 of them are DEFINITES and 3 are on the fence even with no heath testing, we decided not to spay her. My husband was against the spay as well and he was who I thought for sure he'd be taking her to the vet. Come to find out the vet we use who has saved Cuddles time and again wouldn't feel comfortable doing a spay abort so we made the right choice. I think. Maybe. I dunno. I know, not a planned litter, no health tests yadda yadda. I have never had a pit bull litter ever nor ever planned one because I work with rescue. My personal choice. But on the other hand, both parents are titled and working titled plus were training for their CDs and had started Rally so, other than testing, why not? Their parents were health tested, Rowdy's dad's penn hip scores are .39/.39 and Elvis was ofa good patellas and elbows normal etc. Rowdy's still getting neutered I just need to save up another $300 for his films to ofa and thyroid etc. Sigh. Dilly can't be done right now but will be done in April after the pups are all set.

The biggest question that will be answered is was Elvis a day blindness carrier? If we get a affected puppy in the litter the answer is yes. Rowdy and Dilly may be carriers and they may not be but there is no test for this. I'm being as totally honest as I can be about everything and the puppy page is here http://www.dogdances.com/Puppies.html there is also a blog http://www.dogdances.com/puppydiaries/

ALL pups (except Ruth's) are on a co-own even though I hate them, because they can't be bred back into anything Lar-San EXCEPT 2 lines and we want to make sure that it doesn't ever happen. Most puppy homes are spaying and neutering anyway so it's a moot point. I am fully prepared to keep as many of the little poop machines as we need to and Laura wants to pick one. Since Bug's not doing too hot we are letting her. Ideally she'll only have 4 and all are gone but my luck she'll have 11.

by **katiek0417** » January 6th, 2009, 1:11 pm

Ahhhh...so an accidental breeding? No worries - I'm not being judgmental - it looks like I might be in the same boat.

It looks like you could very well have a nice litter on your hands, however! And that's a good thing!

by **TheRedQueen** » January 6th, 2009, 1:16 pm

One of our Service dog pups is from an accidental breeding (which is why we got her donated...). It happens.

Were you planning on breeding them sometime, and this just happened early?

Good luck with the pups!

by **katiek0417** » January 6th, 2009, 1:19 pm

TheRedQueen wrote:One of our Service dog pups is from an accidental breeding (which is why we got her donated...). It happens. Were you planning on breeding them sometime, and this just happened early?

Good luck with the pups!

Too bad you don't take herders (heck, you know I'd donate from every litter).

Accidents do definitely happen....poor Dilly - maybe she was raped (it happens)!

by **Karen** » January 6th, 2009, 1:20 pm

TheRedQueen wrote:One of our Service dog pups is from an accidental breeding (which is why we got her donated...). It happens. Were you planning on breeding them sometime, and this just happened early?

Good luck with the pups!

NO Rowdy was getting neutered 4 days after this and it was the earliest appointment we could get at Cuddles' vet. The plan was to get the nuts gone after he CH and while we were following our plan Dilly sure as hell wasn't! And isn't, bet she has the pups on the bed. Gross.

katiek0417 wrote:Ahhhh...so an accidental breeding? No worries - I'm not being judgmental - it looks like I might be in the same boat.

It looks like you could very well have a nice litter on your hands, however! And that's a good thing!

Thanks. they both have their strengths and Rowdy's excellent where Dilly needs to be improved on, so we'll see. Both dogs are small Dilly was 38 pounds and Rowdy 36 so I expect the pups to be small too. Rowdy's dam Layla is only 40 pounds or so and a tad taller than Dilly so the genetics towards smaller hopefully will work out! Roughly 22 days left so we'll see.

by **TheRedQueen** » January 6th, 2009, 1:22 pm

katiek0417 wrote:
TheRedQueen wrote:One of our Service dog pups is from an accidental breeding (which is why we got her donated...). It happens. Were you planning on breeding them sometime, and this just happened early?

Good luck with the pups!

Too bad you don't take herders (heck, you know I'd donate from every litter).

We are trying out collies again...so our "herding breed ban" is somewhat dropped. But I don't think our trainers can handle a malinois or dutchie!

by **Karen** » January 6th, 2009, 1:23 pm

katiek0417 wrote:
Too bad you don't take herders (heck, you know I'd donate from every litter).

Accidents do definitely happen....poor Dilly - maybe she was raped (it happens)!

Yeah and SHE raped HIM! Dilly is a real ho when she's in heat so I have no doubt she initiated the whole thing. She flags everything and is why she wears panties

by **katiek0417** » January 6th, 2009, 1:24 pm

Karen wrote:

katiek0417 wrote:Ahhhh...so an accidental breeding? No worries - I'm not being judgmental - it looks like I might be in the same boat.

It looks like you could very well have a nice litter on your hands, however! And that's a good thing!

Thanks. they both have their strengths and Rowdy's excellent where Dilly needs to be improved on, so we'll see. Both dogs are small Dilly was 38 pounds and Rowdy 36 so I expect the pups to be small too. Rowdy's dam Layla is only 40 pounds or so and a tad taller than Dilly so the genetics towards smaller hopefully will work out! Roughly 22 days left so we'll see.

You must post pics! It sounds like the breeding will work out b/c it's often good when the dogs can make up for each other's weaknesses - or complement the other dog's strengths! They are small dogs - so you will probably definitely get some small pups...although almost every one of Jue's offspring is bigger than he is...even when he's been bred to a small female....

by **katiek0417** » January 6th, 2009, 1:28 pm

TheRedQueen wrote:
We are trying out collies again...so our "herding breed ban" is somewhat dropped. But I don't think our trainers can handle a malinois or dutchie!

Are we able to raise them? In each litter there is one or two that are much lower drive and not appropriate for "working" homes (I mean working in the sense of the kind of work my dogs do - not working in SD type work)...

I think you guys should consider it sometime...seriously....I know that we'd donate from each litter (as long as there was an appropriate pup)...

Karen wrote:
katiek0417 wrote:
Accidents do definitely happen....poor Dilly - maybe she was raped (it happens)!

Yeah and SHE raped HIM! Dilly is a real ho when she's in heat so I have no doubt she initiated the whole thing. She flags everything and is why she wears panties

My lab flags even if you try to pet her...ugh...

by **pitbullmamaliz** » January 6th, 2009, 1:39 pm

I'm not familiar with day blindness. I googled it but there wasn't a whole lot of understandable info. Basically they can't see during the day, only in dim light or at night? Is that right?

by **Karen** » January 6th, 2009, 1:52 pm

There are recent pics on the blog.

pitbullmamaliz wrote:I'm not familiar with day blindness. I googled it but there wasn't a whole lot of understandable info. Basically they can't see during the day, only in dim light or at night? Is that right?

In day blind dogs they can't see in bright light. they are born normal but the rapid deterioration of the rods in the eyes leave them unable to process the light. The eyes look normal through a regular CERF exam and can be detected through light stimulation at an opthamologist's office. Since they are totally blind in daylight by 8 weeks old you know if you have one. They are perfectly fine as pets and with Doggles they can see during the day. They also have exceptional night vision and dayblind mals were used by the eskimos as night time dogs. In all other ways they are totally norma.

by **mnp13** » January 6th, 2009, 1:55 pm

katiek0417 wrote:It looks like you could very well have a nice litter on your hands, however! And that's a good thing!

Maybe... but then again...

These dogs clearly have a serious genetic default in their lines, and there is no test for it. From looking at the pedigrees, it appears to be an X linked genetic fault. For the non-nerds, males have XY chromosomes, females have XX, so an X linked genetic problem (like color blindness in humans) is far more likely to show up in a man than in a woman because a woman has the second X to "cover up" a recessive trait. In a nutshell, the girls carry it, the boys have it.

I was very good with those genetic tables that we had to do in biology, so I can map it out completely if anyone is interested.

So, essentially, you're creating puppies that you know have a high probability of having or carrying the problem. I might not have said anything, but I also remember the serious beating I took from you (and a few others) over Riggs, his breeder, his lines, and everything else that you could think of. You would have crucified me if I had decided to plan to breed him, let alone if I had an "oops" and then kept it. (There is a female that I would breed him to in a heartbeat if the owner of the female asked me to. She has everything that Riggs doesn't, and her good traits match his as well. But since that's not gonna happen, my boy is going to remain celebate.)

And then of course there is this...
http://gaffboard.yuku.com/topic/2245
Post #12

The ones from here will be crossed on a total out tri color Tatonka dog. Providing they are girls. They ought not to be crossed back into any Lar San or RoKi.

It would appear that you are NOT planning to spay the girls? Don't cross them back into Lar San or RoKi because the odds of getting affected puppies would be very high. Instead, do an outcross so the recessive genes stay there but are buried because it's not a common problem and will probably stay "dormant" for a while. Let's HIDE it by outcrossing instead of STOPPING it by altering all of the dogs that have it or have a high probablilty of carrying it.

The alternative is to spay Dilly but she only needs 3 more legs on her GR CH with extremely limited showing.

What does that have to do with anything? She has a conformation title already, and she is quite good in weight pull... and she would be able to continue weight pull after being spayed. You want more letters in front of your dog's name, so you're willing to create puppies knowing that the parents are carriers of a serious genetic fault.

Sorry Karen, you had a LOT to say about me and my dog... and I've seen you say plenty about other people's dogs and breeding. Some people here are "ok with it" and "won't pass judgement" but I'm not one of those people. I'll expect to NEVER EVER see you comment about anyone's litters in the future. You have made the decision to be one of the people you have gone after for so many years.

by **katiek0417** » January 6th, 2009, 1:59 pm

mnp13 wrote:
katiek0417 wrote:It looks like you could very well have a nice litter on your hands, however! And that's a good thing!

Maybe... but then again...

I was more talking about the looks of the dog and the working ability....I looked up day blindness, but couldn't find a whole lot - so I wasn't sure HOW genetic it was...

I was speaking merely on the titles of the parents, etc...

by **Karen** » January 6th, 2009, 2:19 pm

These dogs clearly have a serious genetic default in their lines, and there is no test for it. From looking at the pedigrees, it appears to be an X linked genetic fault. For the non-nerds, males have XY chromosomes, females have XX, so an X linked genetic problem (like color blindness in humans) is far more likely to show up in a man than in a woman because a woman has the second X to "cover up" a recessive trait. In a nutshell, the girls carry it, the boys have it.

I was very good with those genetic tables that we had to do in biology, so I can map it out completely if anyone is interested.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Apparently NOT very good. It isn't sex linked AT ALL. In fact in Tesla's litter the dayblind pup was a female. You're looking at a list of confirmed CARRIERS not a list of AFFECTEDS. This isn't a recessive trait at all either. You are a carrier or you aren't. We've been keeping lists for years of who produced what and I think we know more than your assumption that this is as cut and dried as you're trying to make out.

So, essentially, you're creating puppies that you know have a high probability of having or carrying the problem. I might not have said anything, but I also remember the serious beating I took from you (and a few others) over Riggs, his breeder, his lines, and everything else that you could think of. You would have crucified me if I had decided to plan to breed him, let alone if I had an "oops" and then kept it. (There is a female that I would breed him to in a heartbeat if the owner of the female asked me to. She has everything that Riggs doesn't, and her good traits match his as well. But since that's not gonna happen, my boy is going to remain celebate.)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What Riggs' line carries and what these pups MIGHT carry are totally different. You're looking at a dog dropping dead of SAS by 4 vs. a dog that has a sight issue in bright light. Again I know Chris and have for years so put him up on that pedestal all you want there are people who know different.

It would appear that you are NOT planning to spay the girls? Don't cross them back into Lar San or RoKi because the odds of getting affected puppies would be very high. Instead, do an outcross so the recessive genes stay there but are buried because it's not a common problem and will probably stay "dormant" for a while. Let's HIDE it by outcrossing instead of STOPPING it by altering all of the dogs that have it or have a high probablilty of carrying it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Ruth can do what she likes with her female and yes IF we kept a girl Ozzie is what she would be crossed on. It isn't a hidden gene like you assume it is. The problem is this type of dayblindness isn't the same as the malamute one and there are in fact lines of am staff that carry it but they are still hidden. Just like Ataxia was. So if you don't cross back into the carrier lines of Lar san you won't be spreading anything.

What does that have to do with anything? She has a conformation title already, and she is quite good in weight pull... and she would be able to continue weight pull after being spayed. You want more letters in front of your dog's name, so you're willing to create puppies knowing that the parents are carriers of a serious genetic fault

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Dilly and Rowdy are not confirmed carriers of anything or were you so gleeful to leap over to the Gaff board to look that you missed that? Apparently. There is a 57% chance Rowdy is and a 49% chance Dilly is neither is a definite. There is no test for this as I have stated numerous times. As I also said numerous times I'm not hiding anything at all. As to adding more letters, that's a joke. I like going to shows and doing conformation with my dog. Winning has nothing to do with it, if it did we would have quit showing long ago.

As to being unethical, how? ALL puppy homes know and have known up front all about this from before this even happened because it was the reason Rowdy is getting neutered. IF I was like those other folks as it makes you absolutely thrilled to think I'd have had the pups and hidden them AND the dayblindness issue from the get go. That's not me and I don't do things that way. Not to mention I would have made my own top ten dog years ago with Bug by breeding her back into Gaff but that was unethical so spayed she was.

by **BritneyP** » January 6th, 2009, 2:32 pm

If you are such a proponent of rescue, and always have been, why are you planning on breeding in the future just because you're going to have an accidental litter?

P.S.- Michelle, can we make out? :wink:

by **Karen** » January 6th, 2009, 2:43 pm

BritneyP wrote:If you are such a proponent of rescue, and always have been, why are you planning on breeding in the future just because you're going to have an accidental litter?

Just because someone does rescue, supports rescue, etc doesn't mean that they can't breed. In fact I can think of 3 breeders who also rescue dogs that they have not bred. I will more than likely never breed the girl we keep and since Rowdy is the only male in the house with balls and they are getting removed, I can say that this will never happen again. Period.

As to what the owners of the other puppies do as long as they follow their contracts that is their prerogative as long as they understand the ins and outs of the disorder.

by **mnp13** » January 6th, 2009, 2:53 pm

Karen wrote:Apparently NOT very good. It isn't sex linked AT ALL. In fact in Tesla's litter the dayblind pup was a female. You're looking at a list of confirmed CARRIERS not a list of AFFECTEDS. This isn't a recessive trait at all either. You are a carrier or you aren't. We've been keeping lists for years of who produced what and I think we know more than your assumption that this is as cut and dried as you're trying to make out

A "carrier" is a dog with a recessive trait. That's how they carry it and nothave it. The female dayblind puppy would have had a double recessive trait that would likely be linked to the X chromosome. My educated guess is that since not all of the males have it, that the trait is linked to multiple genes so even the males can be carriers because they can have a few of the necessary recessives but not all of them so it doesn't show up in the male but it might in the next generation because the males recessive would match up with the right recessives that the female has and then you "suddenly" have an affected dog after a few generations of non-affected dogs. Sorry, on this one I actually know what I'm talking about. There are very few tests that I aced way-back-when in AP biology, but genetics was one of them.

Karen wrote:What Riggs' line carries and what these pups MIGHT carry are totally different. You're looking at a dog dropping dead of SAS by 4 vs. a dog that has a sight issue in bright light. Again I know Chris and have for years so put him up on that pedestal all you want there are people who know different.

"A sight issue in bright light" sounds like a MAJOR problem to me. It's bright out in most places every day. People who are active with their dogs have their dogs out in good weather more than bad weather. So the dog will need sunglasses when the person needs sunglasses? Yup, that sounds great to me!

Oh, and Chris is FAR from pedistal status in my world. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Karen wrote:Ruth can do what she likes with her female and yes IF we kept a girl Ozzie is what she would be crossed on. It isn't a hidden gene like you assume it is. The problem is this type of dayblindness isn't the same as the malamute one and there are in fact lines of am staff that carry it but they are still hidden.

"they are still hidden" ARGH. Go spend some time reading up on recessive vs. dominant genes, and make sure to look at how traits can be linked to multiple genes.

There is a 57% chance Rowdy is and a 49% chance Dilly is neither is a definite.

Ok, give me a little while (like till tomorrow) and I'll do a full genetic probability square for you so you can understand. If it is linked to multiple genes then neither dog can appear to be carriers, but together they can make the right mix to make "affected," "full carriers" or "partial carriers" and if you bred the partial carriers to each other you could again create any of the three above cases.

As to adding more letters, that's a joke. I like going to shows and doing conformation with my dog. Winning has nothing to do with it, if it did we would have quit showing long ago.

Try again. If you didn't care about earning titles with your dog, then the possible GrCh would not have figured in at all. Conformation is fun, but you don't enter the ring to not win. Just like you don't enter a pull with the intent to stop your dog before it earns points.

ALL puppy homes know and have known up front all about this from before this even happened because it was the reason Rowdy is getting neutered.

You were neutering Rowdy because you knew he was not breeding quality, but suddenly he is because you didn't want to spay Dilly. All of the homes know about it, but you aren't making it manditory for them to alter the dogs, so you're fine with continuing the problem.

New Puppies

Who is online