I think it’s pretty funny, in a demented, sarcastic sort of way.

I figured I’s pay for it if it was you know, reasonable. Like fifty bucks or less. But four HUNDRED???? C’mon!!!

That kind of desperation knows no bounds.

AKC stopped publishing raw numbers of registrations, which used to be front and center on their website, in a desperate bid to conceal the swan dive they started in the mid 90’s, which must be accelerating now.

And it used to be possible to find a really useful spreadsheet of conformation and performance titles by breed. No more. I think they got PO’d when people used it to point out that some so-called “working” and “sporting” breeds are now entirely show and pet dogs.

I like the attempt to turn their shame into yet another revenue stream.

AKC — you aren’t fooling anyone.

Which I find ironic, since they used to give the information away for free.

Anyway… The Lab Club doesn’t even collect the information.

What information is the AKC trying to charge $400 for?

Uh, No.

They used to provide the information for free.

I spoke to an official of the LRCA and they do not compile the information; what information they DO provide is member donated.

Oh well, can’t fault a girl for being cheap in this economy…

Would be even better if saving dogs from cancer caused by inbreeding wasn’t a shameful secret, but something that was carefully and openly planned, with the results scrutinized for future lessons.

The first flatcoat I ever met was a lovely, sweet-natured liver dog who got tumors before he was two years old. I don’t know how long he got to live, as we moved away shortly thereafter. His owner was beside herself.

We wanted a Bernese mountain dog when looking for our first dog together, almost twenty years ago. Were on the list and approved for a puppy, and the litter had been born. Then the breeder — recommended because her dogs had great temperaments — admitted that she’d never had a dog live past age six, and never personally known one to live longer than eight. If bloat didn’t get them, cancer stepped up to the plate. We passed.

I learned another question to ask from that.

Although I have no way to know if anything “untoward” happened over there, I hope to GOD ALMIGHTY that the Swedish folks have had enough sense to let something else in the flat-coat gene pool, so maybe my dogs will be less likely to have to deal with the genetic bottleneck that has made my lovely little breed a cancer magnet as well.

I hope over there, once upon a time or two, somebody’s nice field Lab snuck in and had his way with some nice flatcoat girl or even someone’s Munsterlander did or … hell, I’d be happy if a neighbor’s farm collie made sweet music with my dogs’ ancestor or two or three.

Truly, I would. Accidental or accidentally on purpose and hush hush hush … I’m good with it!

My point is that if there are only a finite number of dogs to begin with in any genetic ‘bank’, removal of any of them (affected dogs SHOULD be removed) still diminishes the overall number of available genes.

So, with the reduction of any number, say from the even more obscure breeds like Field Spaniels where it is purported that only about 3000 exist worldwide, there are a host of problems that present themselves to such a limited gene pool. (http://kaper.home.comcast.net/~kaper/)

On the website I offered, the individual claims that all of the current FS’s stem from the same four dogs.

I do know that there is a genetic predisposition in Field Spaniels for cancers that kill dogs at very young ages.

It’s the number one killer (as of this writing in 2008).

Where are they to go, if the genetic testing proves a marker for carrier and afflicted dogs?

If every dog in the available gene pool is somehow related, that pretty much narrows the gene pool, wouldn’t it? It could conceivably be that virtually every dog carries a marker for cancer. That would effectively put an end to the current breeding plans of FS breeders with the current genetic availability.

What would the crime be of importing a little Boykin or other working breed of field type spaniel to increase that vigor and increase the genetic diversity?

Being able to identify markers is a good thing. But when applied to already jeopardized numbers of rare breeds, it offers only identification and no real answers.

One of the other issues with this is the “throwing the baby out with the bathwater” syndrome.

Donald McCaig has even stated that amongst stock dog breeders, they don’t screen for hip dysplasia unless a problem surfaces. Yet, there is a high degree of hip dysplasia in Border Collies.

There is a thing as functionally dysplastic, but if care is not taken, from either end of the spectrum, the virtue of all of the other qualities may be irrevocably lost with that decision to not breed to a dog who won’t pass a radiograph. despite all of the other virtues he may possess that his breed may lack, or worse yet, lose altogether.

EIC has been identified in Labs. It affects field dogs and show dogs indiscriminately.

Lab breeders can now identify affected vs carriers and breed accordingly. Labs have a varied and diverse genetic pool from which to choose. Many of whom carry no markers, either carrier or affected.

Show bred greyhounds are starting to crop up with a whole host of problems, as the genetic diversity of the racing greyhounds are excluded from show bred populations, that which makes the greyhound diminishes, one of the most ancient breeds of dogs in existence stands a good chance of an inability to recover from the genetic bottleneck created by breeding for a look as opposed to the ability to course game. The show breeders are aghast at the prospect of corrupting their hallowed bloodlines with those horrid little un-remarkable track dogs. Like they had some sort of disease.

What they have is the answer.

There are others, but I leave it to the committed caretakers of the breeds to decide what they wish to do about it.

actually I thought that by finding the markers and testing you could widen the gene pool as dogs who are “carriers” can be bred to clears… rather than just guessing.. The marker for lens luxation has been found.. it affects mini bulls ( the smaller version of my breed)among other breeds so now carriers can be bred to clears with the knowledge that none of them will luxate.. and then those can be carriers can be bred to clears .. and so on.. does that not INCREASE the gene pool? hasn’t the same thing been done in Bedlingtons with copper problems ( not sure of the correct medical term?)

SAR differs from dogsports in a number of ways, but one of the key differences is the expectation of a very serious commitment to SAR. With dogsports one can dabble in them or have one’s life revolve around them, and that’s OK either way.

K9 SAR is mostly middle-aged women and their nice working-bred dogs. You and FayBee would fit right in :-)