If it's anything like what other registries do, no, you wouldn't know when they died or how they died. That's why it's invaluable to have a good relationship with the breeder/contact in the originating country who will offer the extra information. (For Korean Jindos, the "extra info" is gossip. Over some sort of drink/beverage.)
As for following the pedigrees beyond what's in English, that *is* being attempted, but it's my impression that many of the records are paper records, not electronic. It takes in-person research at the HQ to tease out info. Especially info about the original Kai imports.
I think the Shikoku is on a path to extinction and may end up needing some outcrossing. I was chatting with Vladimir about it and he suggested the aboriginal Laika breeds would probably be a good choice if it ever came to that. I think would never want to be the guy that pushed forthright tho. Like Ann suggested, I 'do rather it start in Japan.
I'm enjoying the debate here. Thanks to everyone contributing to the discussion.
I can't help but wish that there was someone with unlimited resources involved with the breed. Of course I'm sure that could possibly bring a whole slew of new issues to the table, but I'll leave that alone. I've got a hunting buddy who is now retired, but used to be the president of a rather large corporation. He's basically created his own hunting breed over the past 40 years, and has a huge kennel of over 120 dogs. He actually has staff taking care of the dogs. When you have that type of capability you have so many options and can really breed toward exactly what you are looking for.
Hypothetically you can afford to add a new genetically diverse animal to the pool that may have some flaws such as HD for instance, and not worry about having to place pups that are produced. I can imagine as a small scale breeder you could add a dog like that, but then have a problem placing pups from such a breeding. With unlimited resources you can afford to keep the whole litter, and even a few generations to cull out the flaws etc.
It would be great for breeders here in Japan to start testing the NK. It needs to happen, but it will take a long time for testing to become mainstream. There is 0 testing done here, pretty much everything to do with the NK preservation is based on tradition, experience, word of mouth, assumption etc.
Like Brad and Ann mentioned, it does take someone actually taking a look at the hard copies, being here to talk to breeders and collect the 'gossip'. Every once in a while you do collect some useful information out of it. People have questioned why I had to start charging people to cover my expenses when looking for pups in Japan, and I've had to explain the amount of time, effort, and yes money, that goes into making contacts with breeders, building relationships, visiting kennels all over the country to look at their dogs/litters. It's not as easy as looking at a website and seeing what they're up to and what kind of testing they do, the vast majority don't even have websites.
For the Kai, since there are still some decent numbers being produced (as opposed to 300 registrations a year for the Shikoku), there are more lines to choose from, but the fact that popular studs get used all over the place makes it a bit difficult to find new blood. I hope that the efforts that breeders overseas are putting into importing and testing new stock can eventually become useful to the breed here in Japan. Data is important!
As far as what data is included in the registry, it's just the usual 5 gen pedigree. Name, reg number, sex, color, tail type, kennel, owner, DOB, prefecture of origin, and that's just for the pup/dam/sire. The next two gens you have name, reg number, and kennel, and for the 5th gen all you have is names. If you want any more information it involves a lot of kennel visits, gifts, drinking, and building trust for breeders to give you sometimes negative info on certain dogs/lines.
I could go on and on as sometimes I feel that the whole situation with NK preservation is pretty daunting, but I feel that taking one step at a time is all we can do. Genetic diversity, collecting as much information as possible, breeders/owners working TOGETHER and sharing info, and yes, testing is part of that.
To get back to the original question in this thread, I'd check the usual hips/knees/elbows in Kai. Brad and I have seen some iffy looking movement in some dogs. I've seen a few Kai around with some iffy eyes, and I've heard of heart/digestive problems in JKC Kai lines. The lines that have been in the States for several gens may have enough testing done to give a big picture of genetic issues, but it will probably be a while yet before there's enough data from the recent imports to get that overview.
Brad, why not use some Shiba genes to reinvigorate the Shikoku? It seems like using a more related breed would make better sense. There are many healthy established lines of Shiba with good hips, knees and temperament with good drive that could give them some better angulation and maybe fix some of the joint issues. Type is easy to get back compared to a front or rear assembly that is poor. I'm definately not opposed to the idea of outcrossing for health in this case.
I'm sure they'd throw in some of the Japanese breeds before they went Laika. Of course Japanese are purists and at this point in the game I'm pretty sure they'll never outcross.
@lindsayt - Well, for the record, Dr. Beregovoy and I were just having a thought experiment, and since he is more familiar with Laika, I'm sure that played a role in his suggestions.
But, to answer your question, the issue I see with using the Shiba is that it's not really an out-cross. Just 80 years ago all of the NK breeds were one land race, separated primarily by geography, but there was still mixing of the various races.
So, if a stud book was to be opened, and an out-cross was to be used to bring back the vigor of Shikoku, it seems more logical to me to use a breed that would only have a link to the Shikoku from more than 100 years back. The Laika is a good choice for that.
Also, I would shoot to select a breed that was largely unrefined as that would lower the risk of introducing (to the Shikoku) any new (genetic) issues brought on by strict selective-breeding we see in western culture. It may also help bring back some of those lost "aboriginal" traits that the breed (Shikoku) is supposed to still have (like hunting prowess and more "primitive" reproductive traits).
But, again, I'm not suggesting we do this and I totally agree with Shigeru ( @TheWalrus ) that it'll be a cold day in hell before NIPPO allows the mixing of a non-Japanese breeds into the population pool. I think it's more likely the breed will just disappear than them open the stud book to a foreign breed.
@lindsayt and @jenz - I know the conversation has moved on, but I want to clear the air. I did not mean to imply that you've been brainwashed. Only that you've bought into the mantra that health checks, without question, are a litmus test for good breeders. I was reacting to the apparent refusal to accept that, under certain circumstances, there may be other things more important than health tests. I said "drank the kool aid" because to me, it feels like you're unwilling to question that mantra. I meant no disrespect by it.
----
@ayk - Thanks for the link on the Besenji's. Very poignant article.
I'd imagine a Shikoku x Non-nihonken out-cross will receive a similar response as the low uric acid dalmatians. Even though there are some that support it, there's not enough to get it to be officially accepted.
Outcrossing has been done in other breeds and it has gained support. Like that one pointing breed that Dave linked to once... some kind of wire-haired, eastern European breed. @dlroberts What was that again?
This reminds me of when I was in Ecology class and we had a unit on genetics, population dynamics, and biodiversity. My teacher asked me why I already knew everything and I said, "Well, I'm into rare and endangered dog breeds." The issues facing these breeds are similar to the issues facing conservationists. Gotta love biology.
Shigeru is awesome, btw. I wouldn't have Sosuke if it weren't for him, and a lot of people can say the same for their dogs. Gotta love that guy! @TheWalrus
@hondru - The Wirehaired Pointing Griffon, or WPG. That's not universally accepted though. The AKC breed club for the WPG doesn't accept the outcrossed dogs.
Dave, that is not a mantra I have bought into. I think you are painting me with a broader brush stoke than is deserved. Remember, I own a breed where it's been said that around 80-90% of the dogs would not pass hip evaluations (Caucasian Ovcharka) yet they exhibit an impressive working ability. I bought the dog because he can work, not because of OFA, or scores, which he would very likely not pass.
@lindsayt - "80-90% of the dogs would not pass hip evaluations" Am I reading that correctly to say that most of them aren't health tested? If so, why would you support that breed where health testing isn't common place and argue against breeders ignoring health tests in Kai? Again, I mean no disrespect. I'm just trying to understand what the difference in the situation might be.
My position has most definately not been "do or die" for health testings and Kai. I suggested that it would be nice if the males who will go on to be well used had some baseline results, understanding that a breeding at this point will not likely be based entirely off a bad or good score.
It's what I've been told re Ovcharka. It would be nice if more were tested as they grow in numbers but the big breeders are too cheap and self serving.
OFA for my Shibas is going to run $100 each for rads and another 50-60 for fees, for comparisons.
Ah, I'll fully admit to missing this part of your sentiment earlier in the conversation. If there are going to be a select few males used in the majority of the litters, then I would support throwing every genetic, orthopedic, ophthalmological, etc. test we know of at them. But, even more vigorously than I would argue for testing them, I would argue against using them a disproportionate amount in breeding programs. In all of the reading I have done on "health epidemics" in breeds, it is often traceable back to one or two males who generated the vast majority of litters. And in cases like the Basenji that @ayk shared the article about, you have an example of a situation where health test steered breeders poorly. Sure they were able to select away from one problem they could test for, but in doing so they unknowingly selected towards another problem there wasn't a test for (at the time). Out of the frying pan and into the fire. Until it is cheap to sequence the entire genome for every dog in a breeding program, health tests have equal capacity to do harm as they do good IMO.
I still maintain that during the formative generations of establishing a new breed (or existing breed in a new geographic/political location) the single best use of resources is to continue to obtain outcrosses and to use them almost regardless of their health. And any resources expended on health testing are resources that should be spent on obtaining or using outcrosses.
>>@jenz - Having owned some very sick dogs myself, I can appreciate where you are coming from. But let me ask you this, what if the breed we are discussing was in very poor health. Like let's say 95% of the breed, which is a rare breed (so small numbers), has HD and all the representatives of the breed who are HD free are related to each other - like furthest relation being first cousins... Applying your thought process, how could a breeder successfully proceed under those circumstances and only breed 100% healthy dogs?<<
Hmmm. @brada1878, in this case I would either bring in another breed to "buff it up" (the way pointers -I think- were used with Dalmatians recently).
I totally don't mean to disrespect anyone on the board by stating my opinions, and hope I haven't hurt anyone's feelings. Like I may have said--I don't have any NK, just satiating my Akita bug for now lol. I don't even have a rare breed. I primarily work in rescue, with retired racing GHs which are a dime a dozen. Most are pretty closely inbred/linebred from a handful of famous sires and have frustrating health issues- weak bones, preponderance to osteocarcoma and severe osteoarthritis, bone spurs, corns, Larangeal Paralysis, and denegerative lumbosacral stenosis. I think like I've read with many of you-- experiencing health problems in our dogs is just absolutely heartbreaking. I would have given my legs and arms to save my last 2 dogs from the gutwrenching hereditary problems they experienced in their lives. Clifford, who passed away in April--he was my soulmate. I often think about what his breeders could have and should have done to give him a strong, long life- but they didn't. Health tests aren't done on racing GHs- it's all about breeding the winners in hopes of producing the fastest dog. I'm sure --heck, I KNOW- that this colors my feelings strongly on this issue perhaps to the point of obstinacy. So if I've come off as a bull in the china shop about the issue...LOL, I'm sorry, just something I feel very strongly about (health checking breeding stock, that is). I probably should visit a therapist, LOL!
I am not a breeder, but I can easily imagine wanting to produce a litter or two when I get my kai(s). I am willing to buy from a breeder with untested dogs, but will not breed anything untested myself. And the reason I don't require healthtests on parents of my future pup is simply the reasons stated by Dave and Brad. The limited breeding stock. I am hoping to get a pup from Brad sometime in the future, and as I understand it, he actually has done healthtests? @Brada1878 That is no doubt a good thing, though I tend to agree with Tara, that I trust the knowledge about the ancestors to give a picture of the dogs' health. And I trust Brad to be a responsible breeder, so I have no issues buying a pup from him.
I will be cooperating with the excisting danish kai breeder if I ever decide to breed, and she does all healthtests and furthermore there are restrictions set by the Danish Kennel Club as to what dogs is allowed to be breeding material. At this point they are not demanding healthtests for kai, BUT if you do test, for whatever reason, and the dog gets bad results, you are not allowed to breed that particular dog. I don't know the "translation", our hip gradings are A B C D E. Dogs with D or E are not permitted to be used for breeding. Elbows are graded 1 2 or 3. Dogs with elbow grade 3 are not permitted to breed.
Now I could see an issue with this if there were breeders who do not care about healthresults, because obviously you can just choose not to test your dog and breed everything. If you do test there is always the risk that your dog might be prohibited from being breeding material. But I'd always test and never use dogs who got bad results. It is not accepted in Denmark and the kai breed would suffer bad reputation and bad publicity if we choose to ignore the normal breeding "ethics". Dog breeders in Denmark can be really picky about who they like or not, and I would hate it, if we eliminated the kai's chances of gaining popularity in Denmark - and therefore gaining in numbers - because I chose to ignore healthtesting which is something virtually all Danish breeders do. Some will not even breed dogs with C hips even though it's allowed.
Having said that, I would not be afraid to import from Japan and if the future of the breed depended on it, I would be willing to compromise on some things and maybe breed a dog with fx. bad hips if the one I paired it with had good hips.
@brada1878 I too thought that Koda's knee was genetic, but according to two Orthopedic Specialists and three DVM's it's not. Two genetic conditions can cause CL tears, one being LP and the other poor confirmation/angulation. The first surgeon said he might have a slight case of LP undetectable through xray but under anaesthesia he may find some movement. The second surgeon, Dr. Carl Khoeler from UC Davis, that I went with couldn't find any movement in the knee and said that Koda actually had good angulation. The change in degrees was the most minimal he could do in order for the TPLO to override the CL.
This was actually a shock to me. I thought Koda's back legs were straight. Actually I find 98% of Kais to have what looks to me like straight legs. My dad had to remind me that my mind was probably comparing them to the GSD's I was raisded with. Apples and oranges shouldn't be compared.
After the surgery, and because the fraying of the ligament and the amount of scar tissue that was in the knee, we believe that it was in fact the car hitting us that tore the CL, but only a little bit, and it became a time bomb, every turn, every hike, every run created it to weaken more until it completely tore. It does make some sense. That was the only time I've ever heard Koda scream in pain. Something had to happen that night to that leg which was hit by the car.
In the end, I would not cull Koda's sisters from being bred because of this. People's perceptions of Koda worry me because I don't want them to think that his sisters can pass this on. There is NO EVIDENCE to that effect. That's why I want to be clear on this long statement.
@tjbart17 - Sorry Tara, I didn't mean to make you uncomfortable or imply Koda and his relatives have some type of genetic issue. It sounds like you are more educated on the subject than me.
You didn't make me uncomfortable. Come on I think we know each other well enough for you to say that and I appreciate that you did. With the craziness after the surgery I only spoke to the surgeon at Kodas 8 week checkup about this. I never reported back. It's a good thing that I put it out there.
Sorry, just jumping to this convo to bring out this study about japanese breeds and their genetics. It's old study from the earlt 90s named "Biochemical-genetic relationships among Asian and European dogs and the ancestary of the Japanese native dogs" By Y. Tanabe, K. ôta, S. Ito, Y. Hashimoto, Y. Y. Sung, J.K Ryu and M.O Faruque.
This study shows that Japanese breeds are wuite far away from each others in genelevel. For example akita and shikoku had the biggest difference in genelevel. I just bring this up becasue you had been talking about the crossbreeding to save these small breeds (what is most likely the only way). But yeah, here is some parts of the study what i have marked in my memo.
"As far as the domesticated animals are concerned, extensive crossbreeding between breeds or local populations once founded separately is the most possible cause of high genetic variability"
This because they notice in the study that our Japanese breeds have much more differences in their genes compared to european breeds what are really close to each others when you look genes. There is one picture what shows dot where wich breed is and all european breeds are in a tiny are when japanese breeds are scattered all around the pic because their difference between each other is so great. That is also one reason why scientists have been interested about them.
"The wide genetic variety of various populations of the Japanese native dog suggests that the dog derives not from a single origin, but consists of populations derived from several genetically different ancestral populations and their crossbreeds. "
But yeah, this is very long and good study about this subject and atleast i find it interesting And why is that, because we are seriously thinking crossbreeding akitas with shibas. Shibas have second biggest genetic difference to akitas by that study and japanese akita is kinda in big trouble in gene level with all our autoimmune diseases and other problems, more and more coming and in ten years situation have gone only worse and worse everywhere. But this is totally another subject.
What comes to the original post (sorry about the OT!!) I'm not a breeder but my opinion is that you check your breeding dogs. Then you atleast know the problems what your dogs have because also fact is with the small breed in genetic you need to use also those dogs who have problems and aint perfect. Or you can forget the breed totally. You need to take big risks and hope for the best, main point is that future puppy owner also know these risks! But also when you check your dog you know if there is some problem in the hips or knees and you can try to breed your dog with dog who dont have the same problem. For example we have lots of studies about hip dysplasia and we have tested it and noticed that hips just dont go one on one. If you have dog who have bad results for hips and you pair it with excellent you can get puppies who also have excellent in hips and also the bad ones. With small breed you need to make these to happen or you will loose too much genetic variations and continue with those puppies who have excellent on hips (if they are also healthy other way!) and so on. But there is always chance that there aint any puppies with excellent but then you just need to try something else. These things are hard and not as black and white as many seems to think. I know because we went to that swamp at early 2000 and made too thight health reguirements and we lost way too much genetic variations from our dogs! now we are smarter and try to make people check more of their dogs and make wiser decisions.
In Finland we have this great system with our Kennel Club that every dog can be found in their open internet database with pedigree, show results, healt results and everything else what is official. Basicly it makes breeding so much easier when you can actually study the backround! http://jalostus.kennelliitto.fi/frmEtusivu.aspx unfortunalty it is only in Finnish now, but you can find also every statistic about wich males have been used the most wich year in prosentual. Heaven for person who likes to study these things. And we also have program for severeal breeds what is called PEVISA (program against hereditary diseases on dogs) where breed clubs can put registeration musts. For example akitas have PEVISA program here and now we need to check their hips and eyes before the breeding! Results doesnt matter (but this will change next year) Puppys whos parents dont have PEVISA checks done will be registared to different register what is for dogs who are not for breeding and if those dogs make puppies Kennel Club wont register them at all. But yeah, we take health seriously in Finland as you can see from Mirka. It is in our basic thinking because this have been going for so long. I surely hope other countried come behind us atleast with the open databases! Sweden and Eesti have their owns, but ours have much more options.
Sorry about the wall of text and hopefully you can get my points! I'm not trying to offend anyone, thing is that i'm just way too open person when it comes to dog health and I'm also tiny bit mad scientist who keeps on going. Just tell me to shut up with my mumblings when it gets old
Comments
As for following the pedigrees beyond what's in English, that *is* being attempted, but it's my impression that many of the records are paper records, not electronic. It takes in-person research at the HQ to tease out info. Especially info about the original Kai imports.
I can't help but wish that there was someone with unlimited resources involved with the breed. Of course I'm sure that could possibly bring a whole slew of new issues to the table, but I'll leave that alone. I've got a hunting buddy who is now retired, but used to be the president of a rather large corporation. He's basically created his own hunting breed over the past 40 years, and has a huge kennel of over 120 dogs. He actually has staff taking care of the dogs. When you have that type of capability you have so many options and can really breed toward exactly what you are looking for.
Hypothetically you can afford to add a new genetically diverse animal to the pool that may have some flaws such as HD for instance, and not worry about having to place pups that are produced. I can imagine as a small scale breeder you could add a dog like that, but then have a problem placing pups from such a breeding. With unlimited resources you can afford to keep the whole litter, and even a few generations to cull out the flaws etc.
It would be great for breeders here in Japan to start testing the NK. It needs to happen, but it will take a long time for testing to become mainstream. There is 0 testing done here, pretty much everything to do with the NK preservation is based on tradition, experience, word of mouth, assumption etc.
Like Brad and Ann mentioned, it does take someone actually taking a look at the hard copies, being here to talk to breeders and collect the 'gossip'. Every once in a while you do collect some useful information out of it. People have questioned why I had to start charging people to cover my expenses when looking for pups in Japan, and I've had to explain the amount of time, effort, and yes money, that goes into making contacts with breeders, building relationships, visiting kennels all over the country to look at their dogs/litters. It's not as easy as looking at a website and seeing what they're up to and what kind of testing they do, the vast majority don't even have websites.
For the Kai, since there are still some decent numbers being produced (as opposed to 300 registrations a year for the Shikoku), there are more lines to choose from, but the fact that popular studs get used all over the place makes it a bit difficult to find new blood. I hope that the efforts that breeders overseas are putting into importing and testing new stock can eventually become useful to the breed here in Japan. Data is important!
As far as what data is included in the registry, it's just the usual 5 gen pedigree. Name, reg number, sex, color, tail type, kennel, owner, DOB, prefecture of origin, and that's just for the pup/dam/sire. The next two gens you have name, reg number, and kennel, and for the 5th gen all you have is names. If you want any more information it involves a lot of kennel visits, gifts, drinking, and building trust for breeders to give you sometimes negative info on certain dogs/lines.
I could go on and on as sometimes I feel that the whole situation with NK preservation is pretty daunting, but I feel that taking one step at a time is all we can do. Genetic diversity, collecting as much information as possible, breeders/owners working TOGETHER and sharing info, and yes, testing is part of that.
To get back to the original question in this thread, I'd check the usual hips/knees/elbows in Kai. Brad and I have seen some iffy looking movement in some dogs. I've seen a few Kai around with some iffy eyes, and I've heard of heart/digestive problems in JKC Kai lines. The lines that have been in the States for several gens may have enough testing done to give a big picture of genetic issues, but it will probably be a while yet before there's enough data from the recent imports to get that overview.
But, to answer your question, the issue I see with using the Shiba is that it's not really an out-cross. Just 80 years ago all of the NK breeds were one land race, separated primarily by geography, but there was still mixing of the various races.
So, if a stud book was to be opened, and an out-cross was to be used to bring back the vigor of Shikoku, it seems more logical to me to use a breed that would only have a link to the Shikoku from more than 100 years back. The Laika is a good choice for that.
Also, I would shoot to select a breed that was largely unrefined as that would lower the risk of introducing (to the Shikoku) any new (genetic) issues brought on by strict selective-breeding we see in western culture. It may also help bring back some of those lost "aboriginal" traits that the breed (Shikoku) is supposed to still have (like hunting prowess and more "primitive" reproductive traits).
But, again, I'm not suggesting we do this and I totally agree with Shigeru ( @TheWalrus ) that it'll be a cold day in hell before NIPPO allows the mixing of a non-Japanese breeds into the population pool. I think it's more likely the breed will just disappear than them open the stud book to a foreign breed.
But, it's an interesting discussion no less.
----
----
@ayk - Thanks for the link on the Besenji's. Very poignant article.
Outcrossing has been done in other breeds and it has gained support. Like that one pointing breed that Dave linked to once... some kind of wire-haired, eastern European breed. @dlroberts What was that again?
This reminds me of when I was in Ecology class and we had a unit on genetics, population dynamics, and biodiversity. My teacher asked me why I already knew everything and I said, "Well, I'm into rare and endangered dog breeds." The issues facing these breeds are similar to the issues facing conservationists. Gotta love biology.
Shigeru is awesome, btw. I wouldn't have Sosuke if it weren't for him, and a lot of people can say the same for their dogs. Gotta love that guy! @TheWalrus
Jesse
It's what I've been told re Ovcharka. It would be nice if more were tested as they grow in numbers but the big breeders are too cheap and self serving.
OFA for my Shibas is going to run $100 each for rads and another 50-60 for fees, for comparisons.
Ah, I'll fully admit to missing this part of your sentiment earlier in the conversation. If there are going to be a select few males used in the majority of the litters, then I would support throwing every genetic, orthopedic, ophthalmological, etc. test we know of at them. But, even more vigorously than I would argue for testing them, I would argue against using them a disproportionate amount in breeding programs. In all of the reading I have done on "health epidemics" in breeds, it is often traceable back to one or two males who generated the vast majority of litters. And in cases like the Basenji that @ayk shared the article about, you have an example of a situation where health test steered breeders poorly. Sure they were able to select away from one problem they could test for, but in doing so they unknowingly selected towards another problem there wasn't a test for (at the time). Out of the frying pan and into the fire. Until it is cheap to sequence the entire genome for every dog in a breeding program, health tests have equal capacity to do harm as they do good IMO.
I still maintain that during the formative generations of establishing a new breed (or existing breed in a new geographic/political location) the single best use of resources is to continue to obtain outcrosses and to use them almost regardless of their health. And any resources expended on health testing are resources that should be spent on obtaining or using outcrosses.
But let me ask you this, what if the breed we are discussing was in very poor health. Like let's say 95% of the breed, which is a rare breed (so small numbers), has HD and all the representatives of the breed who are HD free are related to each other - like furthest relation being first cousins...
Applying your thought process, how could a breeder successfully proceed under those circumstances and only breed 100% healthy dogs?<<
Hmmm. @brada1878, in this case I would either bring in another breed to "buff it up" (the way pointers -I think- were used with Dalmatians recently).
I totally don't mean to disrespect anyone on the board by stating my opinions, and hope I haven't hurt anyone's feelings. Like I may have said--I don't have any NK, just satiating my Akita bug for now lol. I don't even have a rare breed. I primarily work in rescue, with retired racing GHs which are a dime a dozen. Most are pretty closely inbred/linebred from a handful of famous sires and have frustrating health issues- weak bones, preponderance to osteocarcoma and severe osteoarthritis, bone spurs, corns, Larangeal Paralysis, and denegerative lumbosacral stenosis. I think like I've read with many of you-- experiencing health problems in our dogs is just absolutely heartbreaking. I would have given my legs and arms to save my last 2 dogs from the gutwrenching hereditary problems they experienced in their lives. Clifford, who passed away in April--he was my soulmate. I often think about what his breeders could have and should have done to give him a strong, long life- but they didn't. Health tests aren't done on racing GHs- it's all about breeding the winners in hopes of producing the fastest dog. I'm sure --heck, I KNOW- that this colors my feelings strongly on this issue perhaps to the point of obstinacy. So if I've come off as a bull in the china shop about the issue...LOL, I'm sorry, just something I feel very strongly about (health checking breeding stock, that is). I probably should visit a therapist, LOL!
Jen
I am not a breeder, but I can easily imagine wanting to produce a litter or two when I get my kai(s). I am willing to buy from a breeder with untested dogs, but will not breed anything untested myself. And the reason I don't require healthtests on parents of my future pup is simply the reasons stated by Dave and Brad. The limited breeding stock.
I am hoping to get a pup from Brad sometime in the future, and as I understand it, he actually has done healthtests? @Brada1878
That is no doubt a good thing, though I tend to agree with Tara, that I trust the knowledge about the ancestors to give a picture of the dogs' health. And I trust Brad to be a responsible breeder, so I have no issues buying a pup from him.
I will be cooperating with the excisting danish kai breeder if I ever decide to breed, and she does all healthtests and furthermore there are restrictions set by the Danish Kennel Club as to what dogs is allowed to be breeding material. At this point they are not demanding healthtests for kai, BUT if you do test, for whatever reason, and the dog gets bad results, you are not allowed to breed that particular dog. I don't know the "translation", our hip gradings are A B C D E. Dogs with D or E are not permitted to be used for breeding. Elbows are graded 1 2 or 3. Dogs with elbow grade 3 are not permitted to breed.
Now I could see an issue with this if there were breeders who do not care about healthresults, because obviously you can just choose not to test your dog and breed everything. If you do test there is always the risk that your dog might be prohibited from being breeding material. But I'd always test and never use dogs who got bad results. It is not accepted in Denmark and the kai breed would suffer bad reputation and bad publicity if we choose to ignore the normal breeding "ethics". Dog breeders in Denmark can be really picky about who they like or not, and I would hate it, if we eliminated the kai's chances of gaining popularity in Denmark - and therefore gaining in numbers - because I chose to ignore healthtesting which is something virtually all Danish breeders do. Some will not even breed dogs with C hips even though it's allowed.
Having said that, I would not be afraid to import from Japan and if the future of the breed depended on it, I would be willing to compromise on some things and maybe breed a dog with fx. bad hips if the one I paired it with had good hips.
@brada1878 I too thought that Koda's knee was genetic, but according to two Orthopedic Specialists and three DVM's it's not. Two genetic conditions can cause CL tears, one being LP and the other poor confirmation/angulation. The first surgeon said he might have a slight case of LP undetectable through xray but under anaesthesia he may find some movement. The second surgeon, Dr. Carl Khoeler from UC Davis, that I went with couldn't find any movement in the knee and said that Koda actually had good angulation. The change in degrees was the most minimal he could do in order for the TPLO to override the CL.
This was actually a shock to me. I thought Koda's back legs were straight. Actually I find 98% of Kais to have what looks to me like straight legs. My dad had to remind me that my mind was probably comparing them to the GSD's I was raisded with. Apples and oranges shouldn't be compared.
After the surgery, and because the fraying of the ligament and the amount of scar tissue that was in the knee, we believe that it was in fact the car hitting us that tore the CL, but only a little bit, and it became a time bomb, every turn, every hike, every run created it to weaken more until it completely tore. It does make some sense. That was the only time I've ever heard Koda scream in pain. Something had to happen that night to that leg which was hit by the car.
In the end, I would not cull Koda's sisters from being bred because of this. People's perceptions of Koda worry me because I don't want them to think that his sisters can pass this on. There is NO EVIDENCE to that effect. That's why I want to be clear on this long statement.
----
This study shows that Japanese breeds are wuite far away from each others in genelevel. For example akita and shikoku had the biggest difference in genelevel. I just bring this up becasue you had been talking about the crossbreeding to save these small breeds (what is most likely the only way). But yeah, here is some parts of the study what i have marked in my memo.
"As far as the domesticated animals are concerned, extensive crossbreeding between breeds or local populations once founded separately is the most possible cause of high genetic variability"
This because they notice in the study that our Japanese breeds have much more differences in their genes compared to european breeds what are really close to each others when you look genes. There is one picture what shows dot where wich breed is and all european breeds are in a tiny are when japanese breeds are scattered all around the pic because their difference between each other is so great. That is also one reason why scientists have been interested about them.
"The wide genetic variety of various populations of the Japanese native dog suggests that the dog derives not from a single origin, but consists of populations derived from several genetically different ancestral populations and their crossbreeds. "
But yeah, this is very long and good study about this subject and atleast i find it interesting
What comes to the original post (sorry about the OT!!) I'm not a breeder but my opinion is that you check your breeding dogs. Then you atleast know the problems what your dogs have because also fact is with the small breed in genetic you need to use also those dogs who have problems and aint perfect. Or you can forget the breed totally. You need to take big risks and hope for the best, main point is that future puppy owner also know these risks! But also when you check your dog you know if there is some problem in the hips or knees and you can try to breed your dog with dog who dont have the same problem. For example we have lots of studies about hip dysplasia and we have tested it and noticed that hips just dont go one on one. If you have dog who have bad results for hips and you pair it with excellent you can get puppies who also have excellent in hips and also the bad ones. With small breed you need to make these to happen or you will loose too much genetic variations and continue with those puppies who have excellent on hips (if they are also healthy other way!) and so on. But there is always chance that there aint any puppies with excellent but then you just need to try something else. These things are hard and not as black and white as many seems to think. I know because we went to that swamp at early 2000 and made too thight health reguirements and we lost way too much genetic variations from our dogs! now we are smarter and try to make people check more of their dogs and make wiser decisions.
In Finland we have this great system with our Kennel Club that every dog can be found in their open internet database with pedigree, show results, healt results and everything else what is official. Basicly it makes breeding so much easier when you can actually study the backround! http://jalostus.kennelliitto.fi/frmEtusivu.aspx unfortunalty it is only in Finnish now, but you can find also every statistic about wich males have been used the most wich year in prosentual. Heaven for person who likes to study these things. And we also have program for severeal breeds what is called PEVISA (program against hereditary diseases on dogs) where breed clubs can put registeration musts. For example akitas have PEVISA program here and now we need to check their hips and eyes before the breeding! Results doesnt matter (but this will change next year) Puppys whos parents dont have PEVISA checks done will be registared to different register what is for dogs who are not for breeding and if those dogs make puppies Kennel Club wont register them at all. But yeah, we take health seriously in Finland as you can see from Mirka. It is in our basic thinking because this have been going for so long. I surely hope other countried come behind us atleast with the open databases! Sweden and Eesti have their owns, but ours have much more options.
Sorry about the wall of text and hopefully you can get my points! I'm not trying to offend anyone, thing is that i'm just way too open person when it comes to dog health and I'm also tiny bit mad scientist who keeps on going. Just tell me to shut up with my mumblings when it gets old