Kai Ken Health Checks
I'm looking for some information and advice. I'd like to know what people here on the forum think appropriate health checks for the Kai Ken are? I'd also love to know if anyone has any stats on the the percentage of Kais affected by different hereditary diseases.
I'm coming at the breed from Shibas. All of my dogs get OFA hips and patellas and CERFs done on them. I also do thyroid and glaucoma testing in my older dogs. Doing health checks just seems like common sense to me, and I wouldn't consider buying a Shiba pup whose parents hadn't passed all their health checks.
I am frustrated that the OFA does not list Kai Ken results in their database (they do not list breeds until the numbers are large enough), so I have no idea how serious hip dysplasia is in the breed. When I've asked, I've gotten very different answers from different people. Stats from the OFA site indicate that 18.4% of tested Shibas are dysplastic and 18.9% of tested Akitas are dysplastic, and since it seems likely that the incidence of HD will be higher in the untested population (people who care enough to test are not breeding effected animals), I think it's safe to assume that 1 in 4-5 Shibas and Akitas have hip dysplasia!
I'm a health check fanatic in my own breed, and I'd never recommend anyone buy a Shiba pup whose parents hadn't passed their health checks. I'm trying to decide if I'd be crazy to buy a Kai pup from a breeder who does not have any health check information available. I'm currently looking at a puppy whom I really like and I have been trying hard to convince myself that she's worth the gamble (it seems to me that buying pup from untested lines is a bit like playing Russian roulette). It occurred that maybe someone here could help me figure out exactly what my odds are!
Thanks very much!
Eunice Giles
Nozomi Shibas
I'm coming at the breed from Shibas. All of my dogs get OFA hips and patellas and CERFs done on them. I also do thyroid and glaucoma testing in my older dogs. Doing health checks just seems like common sense to me, and I wouldn't consider buying a Shiba pup whose parents hadn't passed all their health checks.
I am frustrated that the OFA does not list Kai Ken results in their database (they do not list breeds until the numbers are large enough), so I have no idea how serious hip dysplasia is in the breed. When I've asked, I've gotten very different answers from different people. Stats from the OFA site indicate that 18.4% of tested Shibas are dysplastic and 18.9% of tested Akitas are dysplastic, and since it seems likely that the incidence of HD will be higher in the untested population (people who care enough to test are not breeding effected animals), I think it's safe to assume that 1 in 4-5 Shibas and Akitas have hip dysplasia!
I'm a health check fanatic in my own breed, and I'd never recommend anyone buy a Shiba pup whose parents hadn't passed their health checks. I'm trying to decide if I'd be crazy to buy a Kai pup from a breeder who does not have any health check information available. I'm currently looking at a puppy whom I really like and I have been trying hard to convince myself that she's worth the gamble (it seems to me that buying pup from untested lines is a bit like playing Russian roulette). It occurred that maybe someone here could help me figure out exactly what my odds are!
Thanks very much!
Eunice Giles
Nozomi Shibas
Comments
You are touching on a very difficult topic here. The breeds you mention, although rare, are very much established here in the states---where health testing is common among reputable breeders. On the other hand, the Kai Ken, Shikoku, and Kishu have SEVERELY limited gene pools here, and the Hokkaido has no breeding population that I'm aware of. When you are in that situation, you have to look at things a little differently.
The few Kai/Shikoku/Kishu breeding animals we have here in the states are all either direct imports, or very recent imports from Japan---a country where health checks are essentially non existant. So, breeders here are faced with a difficult choice: Do I hold the limited resources (breeding animals) to the same standard I would hold a plentiful resource? Certainly, with 50,000+ liters of labrador retrievers registered by the AKC every year, you can be EXTREMELY selective in what animals you breed. And you absolutely should be. But with fewer than 10 Kai Ken litters in the states every year, the considerations in what you breed have to be much different.
Many of the imports, especially the recent Kai Ken imports, come from working kennels in Japan where the dogs are hunted on wild boar or deer regularly---something they likely couldn't do if they were anything more than mildly dysplastic. Does this mean the dogs that are bred in Japan would pass OFA or Penn Hipp tests? Who knows? But it is certainly a better indicator than not knowing anything about the dogs.
It is my understanding that most breeders in the US have, as a result of the limited gene pool, taken a "don't throw the baby out with the bathwater" approach to their breeding. If there are dogs with severe or dangerous conditions (like seizure conditions), they are removed from the gene pool. But short of that, they are doing their best to "cover" any defects in their lines by creating as much diversity as possible given their limited resources.
I know that doesn't really answer your question. I mainly just want to shed some light on the situation. I obviously felt it was worth the "risk" to get a Kai Ken without any health checks. And I couldn't be happier. Tyson is a wonderful house pet, and an awesome hunting companion.
My belief is that I can do my part by keeping track of my Kai's health and sharing it with the breeding community so as they collectively move forward to create as diverse a population as possible, they are better informed about any issues that might come up.
Now, if 10 or 15 years from now the Kai numbers are thriving and the states and the breeders still aren't doing any health checks, then I might raise an eyebrow. But for now, I see micromanagement of health being counter-productive to the overal health of the population.
I have not looked at the Kai info. however if you are asking about Shiba stats. I know that there was a health survey done and the percents were really interesting, it included breeder as well as rescue etc. I hope it is still available on the search area after the change over/update of that area. I can't find the links at the moment. I believe the highest health issue was allergies at 26 or 28%.
As far as Kai I think there will be a bit more known in a few yrs. I really really hope for the sake of the Kai breed that communication will remain open and everyone will take advantage of testing.
Snf
Every breed is healthy until people start to test them dogs. I have seen this in Schipperke population here in Finland. Our breed was so healthy at the beginning of 2000 decade and now we have some severe hereditary diseases like PRA. I don't want to see that Kai ends up to be dog breed with severel hereditary diseases so that's why I'm doing my bit.
Thanks for the detailed response. As you said, you didn't really answer the question, but you raised some interesting points.
You know, I completely understand why imports don't have health checks behind them, but why aren't people checking their dogs here before they breed them? I can understand not wanting to throw out the baby with the bathwater, but don't you want to know what's the baby and what's the bathwater? I mean sure, if you've got a phenomenal, one of a kind dog who has an issue, since the breeding pool is so small, maybe you'd want to make the careful and conscious decision to breed that individual anyway, but shouldn't you understand exactly what that dog's strengths and weaknesses are first? Shouldn't you be doubly careful to breed that dog only to a partner who you know does not have the same issue? (And if it has to be bred to a dog with the same weakness, shouldn't one know about it so one can be even more vigilent in the next generation?) Where is the virtue in not doing health checks? How does it help a breeder to be unaware of facts that would be so easy to find out? I'm sincerely confused. I'm not saying breeders need to be "more selective", I'm saying I don't understand why they would choose to be ignorant.
I think a lot of people don't do health checks because they've fallen into the old trap of believing their dog is so special that they are above the rules, and are afraid of what they might find out if they take their heads out of the sand. It's bad enough when individual breeders in more popular breeds do that, but if you are implying that the majority of Kai breeders have chosen this attitude, I really worry for the future of the breed. The problem is that breeders who choose ignorance only succeed in building a house of cards, no matter how "special" their dogs are. I sincerely hope that's not what you meant!!
I'm even more confused.
You're best bet to knowing if the parents are tested is to ask the breeder. I'd imagine that breeding dogs are still tested, even if there is a leniency with imperfections, to at least know what can happen later on and who to best pair that dog with.
I'm not sure about other breeders who are importing and if they are doing health checks or not on their dogs. I sure hope they plan on doing so for their newer imports to be sure if there are any hereditary diseases. My Kai was imported while his Dam was already pregnant with him and I already knew that the Sire and Dam were not health checked. It was a risk I was willing to take when I said yes to getting my boy.
I do plan on breeding my Kai, but I may not if a serious issue comes up when he gets health tested. I feel as though he is one of a kind and is very special, but not everyone who feels that way about their dog will breed them. There's one thing about feeling that a dog is special, but another about being passionate about the breed and wanting to improve it not destroy it. We can only hope that the kai breeders now and future breeders will have the same outlook on wanting to preserve the breed and share information with each other about the dogs they import or future dogs from the litters they have.
I did want to point out though that OFA ( at least in the past) would show Pennhip scores.
In the beginning, 15 years ago, you can pull OFA certs on our original dogs including Rikiro (who is related as a great grandfather to most of our dogs). Mary Malone (ooh mufasa) did OFA certs on her dogs. They are all there if you know the name to pull from the website. All the dogs came out hips/knees "good."
Since then, and I would assume because we haven't added any additional lines to the pool of US originals, the breeders have not done OFA checks. Rather, the community has kind've played the referee of sorts. I can say that there have been two dogs with heart murmurs and a couple with the early onset of catarax. I have not today heard any gossip about bad hips or knees. Safe to say, I don't think you are going to risk getting a dog with bad hips or knees.
I will let others add about the imports. I will say that if all goes well, I actually want to get my next Kai from the imported lines that do not have these checks. And I am 100% confident in their health.
You make a very good point. And in principle I agree with you.
In reality though, it's a numbers game and the numbers just aren't there. We're not talking about any of the breeders really having much in the way of options here. Registration issues have long been a concern with distinct AKC, UKC, and Aigokai gene pools. As I understand it, that barrier may have just been taken down (in the last few weeks), but don't quote me on that. When you subdivide the breeding population into those three distinct groups, the picture becomes a bit more clear as to why breeders *MAY* have chosen to ignore health certs. Hypothetically, let's assume there are 30 dogs in the breeding population. I actually don't think that number is too far from the truth, but I don't have solid numbers to back it up either. If you divide that roughly evenly among the three groups, any one breeder has access to 10 dogs, and probably only five personally (assuming there are two breeders in each group). So any one person breeding may have two males and three females. Realistically, in that scenario, the options are so limited that taking any single dog out of the program essentially kills it. Further, in order to have any sort of a program, pretty much all of them are going to have to be bred to each other at some point.
Keeping that in mind, let's consider the financial aspect. While I would never support a breeding operation being a for profit venture, you can't take money out of the equation either. Buying and importing dogs is very expensive (I know, I've done it). You're talking about a minimum of $2,000. Conservatively, let's assume that it costs $400 to do all of the health certs on a dog. To test all five dogs a breeder has in their program would cost $2,000. So I ask you, which is a better use of that money? Bringing in an outcross or doing the certifications on what you've already invested in?
You may be thinking, but there are five more dogs that another breeder owns, why not use them? Well, geography plays a role in that decision. Stud fees aside, collecting semen and doing an AI can cost upwards of $3,000. Taking a week off of work and driving for two straight days to do a natural breeding is equally costly when you consider fuel costs, hotel rooms, and the opportunity cost of missing work. Again, why not use that money to expand the gene pool?
Whether or not you like or appreciate how delicate the situation is, that's the truth. The Kai/Shikoku/Kishu are all in a precarious position in the states. A few dedicated people are doing their best to help that. But, they have to work within the constraints of registry issues and they do the best with the limited resources they have.
In a "more perfect world", those people doing the breedings would have unlimited finances and could test and cull according to the highest standards. Some may argue that they shouldn't be breeding if they can't afford to do it to the absolute highest standards. And they would definitely be entitled to their option on that. But, they would also be precluding themselves from owning one of the shika inus.
So really, the question you need to consider is, how should these breeders allocate a very limited resource (their time, money, and dogs)? I'm guessing you can probably see what I believe is the best allocation based on my argument here. And it fits with what I perceive is going on in the Kai community in the states. What you need to decide is if you feel the same.
---
As a side note, if buying a puppy from untested parents makes you uncomfortable, why not offer to pay for the parent's health certifications? Then you'll know exactly what you're getting, and you'll definitely be helping the breeding community out by making that information available to them.
Now, if you want to argue that the offspring of the imports should be tested, then I could possibly support that. But until there is some "critical mass" of breeding dogs it's not a smart allocation of resources to be testing IMO. Perhaps you think the breeding community is already at that critical mass. Truthfully, I haven't given it enough thought to say for sure what I think that critical mass is. But I do not feel that the current gene pool is large enough.
---
On a personal note, while I am not a breeder, nor do I have a desire to have breeding program, my imported male is intact and will be made available to breeders if they want to use him. I do plan to do health certs on him after he's old enough. But I sincerely hope that he will be used regardless of the certs because the genetic diversity is so important at this point.
Having written, we've tested hips, elbows, knees, eyes, and done blood screenings on all our imports and have culled dogs from our program who didn't meet our health requirements. We've also submitted results to the OFA, but, as you already saw, those results aren't online (yet).
Also, I'd like to point out, the OFA is useless if there are no positive and negative results posted. The OFA is a breeder's tool for improving the health of their dogs, it's not a "health registry" database to prove who tests and who doesn't - their are other ways to test the health of a dog that doesn't involve the OFA.
----
@Nozomifarm - Eunice, you should breed Kai. Obviously the breed needs more health conscience breeders. You too, Lindsay ( @lindsayt ). It really only goes so far to complain about breeders not doing health tests. If you want to help the breed, set an example and breed Kai.
----
This is something that frustrates me. Breeders who are in breeds with a large AKC population, where there is a relatively solid understanding of the health of the breed and lines, and, therefore, can be highly-selective as to whom they purchase their initial breeding stock from, tend to get on their "high horse" about health checks and such when discussing other breeds with much smaller populations. That's a very comfortable position. Had they struggled through the initial importing, testing, and selection - making the real tough choices - perhaps they'd speak with a more humbled tone when discussing the rarer breeds... But then, when it comes to a point where those breeders can make a difference for a breed who is in it's infancy (like the Kai Ken or the Shikoku Ken), they shy away due to fear of health issues. At some point someone has to take on the risk, and do their best to help the breed - and, yes, you will encounter health issues.
----
Also, no worries, Lindsay. I didn't take (any of) it as if it were directed at me.
----
To everyone else who has responded to this thread, thank you. I've been going back and forth about this puppy, and hearing about other's "successful gambles" had made me feel that much more confident.
@dlroberts - With all due respect, I read your last post with a feeling of tremendous envy as it's obvious all your dogs have been healthy. Anyone who has ever owned a dog with severe hip dysplasia or owned a dog who has torn his ACL because of bad patellas, who has had to drop everything in their lives to come up with the 3-6K required to "fix" their beloved pet so he can walk again, who has had to nurse their dog back to health through the long rehabilitation period and PT sessions, who has watched their dog grow old before his time, crippled by arthritis (because even the best "fix" money can buy isn't all that great)...well, anyone who has been through that, does not call the money spent on health checks (for any breed of dog) a waste of resources. (And, what's really sad is that many people are not lucky enough to be able to afford the experiences with hip dysplasia and luxating patellas that I have had - many people are forced to euthanize their dogs, which seems unimaginably worse). It is a fact that hip dysplasia and patellar luxation are both inherited conditions that we can test adult dogs for. I believe that, as a breeder, I owe it to myself, my dogs, my breed, and my puppy buyers to do my best to produce healthy dogs. If you figure $400 per breeding dog to do heath checks, and you figure (conservatively) each dog will have three litters of three puppies each, you're talking about an additional cost of less than $100 per puppy. When you figure that the cost of a THR surgery (hips) is about $5000, and the cost of a TPLO surgery (knees) is about $3000 per side, investing that extra little bit in health checks seems like a drop in the bucket. But, hey, that's just my opinion.
Even with certifications and great knees things can happen. Unfortunately, I have felt your pain but honestly I don't trust OFA cert's anymore. I'm glad to hear that Brad has them, and I am glad that Dave will get them, but I know that both know the lineage of their dogs for generations back. And honestly that means more to me than a test. I'm not planning on becoming a breeder, but I'm sure I would certify as well.
Koda's ACL probably tore from being neutered young which weakened them due to hormone decreases, and after a car hit us last December. I don't think you will have an issue with a Kai as far as genetic problems go. But life still happens.
Do you mind if I ask where you are getting your pup from?
Has anyone ever heard of a Kai with LP or HD?
I would kind of like to give some of my experience that can relate to this statement that Brad has made. My Miyu, even though she is a shikoku and not a kai, is living proof of this concept. Her dam descends from lines used in Europe, of which I think they do some health testing, while her father is a direct import from Japan. Both parents have scored good on their OFA scores and prelims.
In the end though, my Miyu wound up with a lot of recessive traits (black/tan color, extra toes) and has been OFA prelimed with moderate HD. I had gotten Miyu's hip x-rays during her spay, as I wanted to take the opportunity to help the breeder in know the health of what is produced. This led to Miyu's breeder, and those who had her siblings, to take the extra step to check them now instead of later. This may also lead to Miyu's father not being bred anymore and her brother to sire a smaller amount of litters than initially planned.
Basically what I am trying to get at is that an import who aces the health tests, and comes from a country that doesn't really do many health tests, will not guarantee you perfect puppies. Right now these breeds (kai, shikoku, etc) are at their infancy with very limited information about their general health. Health testing the imports is going to bring the statistic of one dog, but through breeding and testing of the import's descendants, you can get a better idea of the health trends of specific lines, and once enough data is collected, these trends can be used to try to eliminate major health issues.
In about a year, I will get Miyu's hips re-examined, and have her tested as if she were to be bred, so that not only do I have an understanding of what to expect but also so that there is more information to help those who are active breeders of this breed.
So don't for a second think you have me figured out. "With all due respect"? Kiss my ass.
If the lack of testing comes down to an issue of money or convenience, I will get on a high horse about it, no matter what the breed. I'm sorry, but I believe if you can't afford the money and the time to do it right, you shouldn't be breeding (no matter what breed or species). I do find it interesting to note that the people who are actually putting the time and money into the importing seem to be the same people who ARE choosing to do the health testing, which only makes sense if you think about it (you've already invested so much that you may as well invest a little bit more and do it right). As I said before, my objection is not about people consciously choosing to breed dogs with issues (I understand that that can't always be avoided with a small population), but about people (in any breed) choosing not to look for or acknowledge issues.
For whatever it's worth, it seems like most of the recent imports have been tested or will be tested, and I feel much better about the descendants of the original imports knowing that the foundation dogs were all tested. I'm glad I asked the question here on the forum as I've learned a lot. I just wish the info were more easily accessible to a newbie like myself!
Thanks
@Nozomifarm Congratulations on the puppy. I've had the pleasure of meeting one of Rita and Pam's pups. Probably from the same parents and quite possibly the same litter or the next one as yours. I believe they did back to back breedings with the same dogs.
Will you be breeding and showing her? And if so will you be doing health checks on her and her parents given your stand on the issue? No offense.