Jump to content
Check out the Harmonization of Genetic Testing for Dogs Read more... ×
Translation Help | Aide à la traduction | Käännösohje | Übersetzungshilfe | Oversettelseshjelp | Översättningshjälp | Ayuda de traducción Read more... ×
International Collaboration For Dog Health And Welfare. Join Us.
×
  • entries
    24
  • comments
    15
  • views
    8,398

Improving dog health: what actions for breed associations?

Gleroy

Viewed: 1,137 times

blog-0633774001437405976.jpg

When considering implementation of breeding strategies in relation to health of welfare, breed associations and Kennel clubs constitute the first actors susceptible to implement adequate actions. There are however multiple problems in the implementation of efficient strategies, including the fact that, even once efficient clinic or genetic diagnosis have been developed for a specific disease, clubs often don’t know how to proceed then. Efficiency and potential side effects may indeed be difficult to assess, while some choices maybe considered as unpopular, and therefore rejected by breeders. Moreover, in some case, national legislation does not permit the implementation of specific action.

However, when thinking about it, there is a large diversity of initiatives that can be implemented by clubs to promote the health of their breeds, with specific advantages and limits. In the following table, I tried to list some examples, considering those actions can be sorted according to the fact they are based on restrictions on the use of reproducers, promotion of healthy dogs, or information provided to owners and breeders.

blogentry-20-0-01266500-1437405884_thumb

Carrot and sticks strategies

The first categories of actions are related to constraints or incentive that can be set to limit the use of dogs that can be deleterious to the health of the breed (note those dogs can be healthy by themselves but carriers of deleterious defects), and promote on contrary healthy dogs. Restrictive measures aiming at banning some dogs from reproduction, or some specific mating, are probably the most evident. Classically it may be decided, for a specific disease, that only non-affected or non-carrier dogs may reproduce. Also, the fact that mating between merle dogs is forbidden in numerous countries relates to this kind of measure. Such measures have the advantage of efficiency, as they may unsure that no product will be affected by the targeted condition (or eventually carry it). A major drawback is that they can be viewed as more or less constraintful by breeders. This is why, before their implementation, it is important to communicate clearly the reason why such action is taken. Note that in some countries, as in France for instance (as well as in USA from what I know?), it is, in theory, not allowed to ban a dog from reproduction.

It can be also decided, as a variant, that to obtain a given award, dogs must be non-affected or non-carriers. In France for example, several clubs impose restriction on health status for the title of national champion. Such measures have the advantage to be less binding; they will be probably also less efficient.

Finally, Clubs can also decide to reward dogs with healthy status or breeders putting effort on breed health, by promoting them in their website for instance. Of course, the efficiency of those measure depend largely if the reward as some impact in term of reproduction. On the other hand, it is also important to assess the consequence of a given measure on breed diversity and health. The constraints and incentive should not restrict the number of reproducers to a few sire or dams, otherwise it could led to the opposite effect to the desired one (see this previous note for more information).

Increase awareness and provide information

When there is a given health problem within a dog breed, a classical reflex is sometime to hide the problem and make as everything was ok, while the best thing to do should be to take action before it’s too late. Similarly for health strategy, an interesting option should be provide information to owners and breeders on the diseases and health and dogs to allow them to make the best choices. Of course, this requires to have access to the information, as well as the right to use it.

Despite the potential constraint that may exist for breeding strategy implementation, given the diversity of potential actions that can be taken for health improvement, there should be not excuse for immobility. If Breed clubs want to remain legitimate stakeholders in dog breeding, they have to take their responsibility and act to the best of their ability to insure a future to dog health and welfare.

 

Credit picture: I. Horvath

 



2 Comments


Recommended Comments

Interesting post... thank you!

 

Many National (Parent) and Regional clubs affiliated with the AKC recommend breed specific health and genetic testing be done and/or offer recognition to breeders whose dogs have been tested; breeding strategies may exist, primarily as recommendations, and may be outlined in individual club's codes of ethics. See CHIC for information on parent club participation/tests recommended by breed. That said many purebred dogs are bred by breeders who operate outside the AKC and its affiliated clubs.

 

Banning a dog from breeding in the US - there is no mechanism to enforce such a ban. In the US - registration of dogs with AKC or other registries: breeding of dogs is not dependent on whether or not health screening/genetic testing is done. There is also no requirement that dogs be insured. State and local laws exist for licensing of pets which carries a requirement to vaccinate for rabies; communities may restrict the number of dogs allowable in a given home/residence, and in some cases zoning/other local regulations govern issuance of permits for commercial breeding facilities / breeding kennels (typically > 3 or more breeding animals).  The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) / The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) operate under provisions outlined in The Animal Welfare Act to see to the welfare of animals, including inspections of kennels/dogs owned/bred by USDA licensed breeders. "Lemon Laws" exist in some states and the courts may offer some protection to consumers post purchase of a pet that is ill.

 

Implementing efficient strategies to see to improving health of dogs may be somewhat different in the US than in other places. Much of the task falls to the individual breeder.

Share this comment


Link to comment

Thanks for this comment (exactly the kind we need to see difference across countries) !!!

 

Among other things, I think you are perfectly right to refer to dog insurance, which may probably be a way (depending on the companies rules) to push breeders and owners for more healthy dogs.

 

You also illustrate well the fact that the implementation of breeding strategy will be largely influenced by the national legislations.

Share this comment


Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • International Dog Health Workshops

    2-15-2018-4thidhw-postcard8inx3in-web.png

    Hold the Date for the 4th IDHW in the UK!
    Co-hosted by The Kennel Club and IPFD
    May 30th - June 1st, 2019
  • Our Partners

    •   Mars Veterinary is a business unit of Mars Petcare, the world’s largest pet care provider. Their mission is to facilitate responsible pet care by enhancing the well-being and relationship bet…
    • The FCI was a Founding Partner of the International Partnership for Dogs; As of January 1, 2018, FCI is no longer an IPFD Partner.   The Fédération Cynologique Internationale is the World C…
    • The SKK - Svenka Kennelklubben (Swedish Kennel Club, in English), is Sweden's largest organisation dedicated to dogs and dog owners. We represent the interests of our 300,000 members – first time d…
    • The French Kennel Club - SOCIÉTÉ CENTRALE CANINE (SCC) - was founded in 1881 as a non-profit organization by dog fanciers aiming to replenish native dog breeds and to bring in and establish foreign…
    • Agria Djurförsäkring (Agria Animal Insurance) is one of the world's leading animal insurers specialising in small animal and equine insurance. The company dominates Scandinavian pet insurance and h…
    • The Norwegian Kennel Club (NKC) was founded in 1898, and is the largest organisation for dog owners in Norway.   Website: https://www.nkk.no/english/category1045.html Norwegian Kennel Club…
    • The VDH - Verband für das Deutsche Hundewesen (German Kennel Club in English) is the foremost organisation representing the interests of dog-owners throughout Germany – the first address to find ou…
    • Suomen Kennelliitto (Finnish Kennel Club, in English) - Established in 1889, the Finnish Kennel Club is a nationwide expert organisation on canine matters. Its aim is to promote the breeding of ped…
    • The OFA was a Founding Partner of the International Partnership for Dogs; As of January 1, 2018, the OFA is no longer an IPFD Partner.    Founded and originally incorporated as a private no…
    • The Kennel Club is the largest organization in the UK devoted to dog health, welfare and training. Its objective is to ensure that dogs live healthy, happy lives with responsible owners.   …
    • The Irish Kennel Club promotes the responsible ownership and breeding of dogs throughout Ireland through education, registration, training and support schemes and events.   Website: http://…
    • Agria is one of the world’s leading animal insurers, specialising in small animal and equine insurance. Founded in Sweden over 120 years ago, Agria came to the UK in 2009 and is now a prominent feat…
    • Royal Canin is a global leader in pet health nutrition. In an industry that continues to adapt to popular trends in cat and dog food, our mission will remain the same; to constantly bring, through H…
×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.