[pyrnet] Consider breeding carriers (a proposal)

["Linda Weisser" <lmweisser@olywa.net>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Patric Lundberg <pyrsrgr8@yahoo.com>

<<If we categorically stopped breeding any dog that
has the possibility of being a carrier I bet we would end up with a
short list of Pyrs indeed (and suffer the consequences of an
intellectually-induced genetic bottle-neck for the breed).

<snip>

<<The remaining half which is tested clear now can carry on all the
good qualities of the breeding without the dwarf-causing gene.  The
strength of this approach is that we would not lose all the diversity and
strengths of all the carriers/potential carriers. To categorically not
breed *suspected* (or even verified) carriers at this point would not be in
the best interest of the breed as a whole (not genetically or otherwise).>>

Interestingly enough I had a long conversation with George Padgett at the
national in Allentown in 1993 on this very subject.  He said that there may
indeed be cases where one actually breeds a *known* carrier.  He had us
write down a list of genetic problems in the breed at random.  We came up
with a number of things ranging from HD and PL to bad bites and monorchids.
Then he asked us to rank those things based on his Disagreeableness of
Genetic Traits list.

(This list can be found at:
http://www.workingdogs.com/doc0031.htm )

Of course things like HD and PL were much higher in our rankings.  Then he
created a scenario for us.  Suppose that we had a Ch. bitch with many, many
virtues, except that a strong line of PL ran through her pedigree.  As far
as we know, this bitch has no dwarf links.  Now suppose that we had 4
possible stud dogs.  For the sake of the discussion, all champions, all hip
certified.  One of the 4 is a known dwarf carrier, *but* there is no known
PL in his line.  The other 3 are pretty much "dwarf free" but all have
links to PL.  So, what does one choose?  The point of this exercise was not
to recommend breeding known carriers or to say that there are not other
options, but simply to remind us that genetic choices and genetic decisions
are always more complex than we would like to think and always less clearly
black and white.

My personal choice in dealing with dwarfism is simply to avoid it in every
way that I can.  That is easy for me.  It is neither easy nor possible for
many excellent and ethical breeders.  Let's walk in their shoes before we
decide what they should or must do.

<<BYB and farmed-for-cash-crop/puppy-milled pyrs would be
>at an immediate disadvantage ->>

Ah hah, but here is a terrifying scenario which was presented to me at
Sacramento by more than one person whose opinion and commitment I respect.
Having a marker will also allow people to deliberately produce dwarfs by
selecting *for* carriers.  This stunned me at first but several health
committee people have gotten quite a few calls from people who are just
dying to have a Pyr dwarf.  What happens when it becomes possible to
virtually guarantee those people what they want?  I do not think that this
possibility should slow or halt work toward a marker but it is something to
be recognized.

Linda Weisser
lmweisser@olywa.net