Re: [pyrnet] Dwarfism--Facts and gossip

[June Jones <pyrlady@neto.com>]

Linda Weisser wrote:

> -
> :-((  Listing of carriers could be helpful but there are certain caveats.
> Firstly, the number of *known* carriers (defined as animals that have
> produced a dwarf) is fairly short.  Probably 60 or so animals.  Once you
> know that an individual is a carrier where do you go from there?  That
> individual has only one parent that is a carrier.  Which one?   Often this
> is not definitively known.  So--does the concerned breeder guess?  If so,
> does that guessing lead to even more speculation and possibly to more
> gossip etc etc?
>

I would think a pedigree analysis like for the malamutes would be better than
nothing.Could you tell us the first year a dwarf was reported and if looking at
pedigrees,were the first 2 carriers related?If so,how many lines are involved
now.How big of a problem is production of dwarfs compared to other health
problems?Is there a program going on for test breeding - approved by the club
or any litter testing?

Could you send a questionaire to all breeders in the studbook for  a better
overall look to see how many more are out there? I guess that would still miss
the dairy goat breeders if they shun akc.

I know of 3 litters in Texas and none are as severe as the malamute
picture.Looking at that picture,I can tell you from living in the country any
farm breeder would destroy those puppies and keep their mouth shut but if they
looked like the dwarfs that I know of ,they would keep them and sell them .

What could the non-member pet owner do to help?Tell us what you need.

June Jones

>
> As you know, when it comes to dwarfs it is one of my big issues that there
> is so much careless talk and speculation out there by people who have only
> a vague and general understanding of the facts.  It is one thing for
> concerned and affected breeders to discuss the possibilities with other
> informed people.  Often the health committee.  It is quite another thing
> for non-involved people to engage in random speculation.  Or worse yet, to
> get their facts wrong when they feel compelled to "share" information "for
> the good of" some reasonably innocent party.
>
> Listing affecteds and/or carriers in a public forum is a two edged sword
> and its value is, to some degree, dependant upon the knowledge of the
> reader.
>
> Linda Weisser
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to esquire@pyrnet.org with
>         unsubscribe pyrnet-l
> as the BODY of the message.  The SUBJECT is ignored.