IMPORTANT - poll for ALL members

[whiteone]

wow everyone seems to be in a fuss... Why????
m/c once again I would like to thank you for your knowledge in this matter but pls not forget you had to educate your self also. I understand how this subject may seem to repeat itself, but maybe because there are so many unanswered questions and one persons opinon may not be the end . Thats what makes it so great..
The Great White Debate...
everyone relax and have a great night...
thanks again

 

[JulieM]

All that needs to be done is for registered boxer breeders (no point including the charlotans) to take a leaf out of the book of Dalmation breeders and perform BAER testing on any whites they produce.

Well, although you would consider me a charlatan, I would probably do this anyway. (Just joking, but in the US being a "registered" breeder is a) not that simple and b) not that indicative of ethics, so singling them out would probably not help the cause any here.)

wow everyone seems to be in a fuss... Why????

I don't see a fuss at all; perhaps it's just wishful thinking on your part....

I understand how this subject may seem to repeat itself, but maybe because there are so many unanswered questions and one persons opinon may not be the end.

Agreed, but in the first place I don't think there have been any questions asked that have not previously been answered on the board, if people took the time to look through the archives. In the second place, we are not discussing opinions but facts - white Boxers carry the extreme piebald gene which can cause deafness. No emotions or opinions, just science.

 

[whiteone]

All I can say is Iam trying to learn and understand and educate myself not trying to win a war. The report I read was mostly on dalmatians is there any reorts on the white boxer??
also why are dalmatians being in best of breed shows if they have this defect? I saw the ukc show last night. I also understand that some white boxers may become deaf because of there pigment, and or the gene, but that also goes for the whole list of dogs on the report.
I did by the way go to the archives and found the same infor I am getting now, which is fine but I wish there was some updated facts on boxers not dal, and if we needed to go back to archives to help us then why are there so many refering to web sites why not say archive#1???
we can all refer to this information all day long and u will still be right they do carry the gene, I was wondering can the breeders (dogs) be tested for the gene before they breed? and if so than if they had it wouldn't it be better not to breed that pair?? just asking ?

 

[velosue]

I don't believe that statistics on one breed of dog should be wholesale conferred to another breed period. A general trend can be inferred but not specific numbers. The breeding of Dalmatians and boxers have taken very different paths and are "relatively" far removed.

Originally posted by velosue
This is an instance where the US Boxer Assoc needs to take a role in doing surveys.



posted quote by Marimat
No, this is an instance where the boxer world EVERYWHERE needs to take a role in surveys, data collection etc.


Yes, I believe all boxer lovers should take interest in these type of questions but data compiled by one organization is much more complete and all inclusive than the scope of each individual surveys and data collections. Additionally in conjunction with the AKC it has access to all registered Boxer Breeders and has the capability to do a very comprehensive survey. Using all available resources, organizational and private would make the collective data sample larger and more accurate.

Thank you for providing the specific definition of culling but I would argue that the general definition most people infer when you say "culling" is the killing of undesirable pups whether it be for whiteness or any other characteristic that a breeder finds undesirable. (of course I could be wrong) Hopefully more breeders will cull puppies by requiring spay/neuter.

Thanks for including the website for the vibrating collars, never having a deaf pet I hadn't the need to research them before. For readers who may have missed the site: http://www.deafdogs.org/resources/vibramakers.html


I hope people do not contrue this as "raising a brouhaha" or "in a fuss" but I firmly believe that lively and spirited debate is much more informative and interesting than when everyone agrees with one another. It is nice and enlightening when I have the opportunities to revise or change my opinions.\

Have a happy day

 

[Scorpio]

Sorry never have met any deaf boxers.

 

[Magoo's Mama]

I've known only 2 deaf Boxers....both were brindle, both were from the same bloodline as my dog (one was the SAME litter, and the other was the litter before his).

Each litter had 5 living pups, in case you'd like statistics for the poll.

--Fran:p

 

[JulieM]

I don't believe that statistics on one breed of dog should be wholesale conferred to another breed period. A general trend can be inferred but not specific numbers. The breeding of Dalmatians and boxers have taken very different paths and are "relatively" far removed.

But the genetic basis for the condition is the same, it is the statistics for the gene that are being discussed not the breeds. (And I am the first one to argue that no, we do not have specific studies on Boxers and we need them to be able to accurately assess the situation - but I do not disagree that the issue is there and that it is logical to believe it follows the same rate of expression.)

Yes, I believe all boxer lovers should take interest in these type of questions but data compiled by one organization is much more complete and all inclusive than the scope of each individual surveys and data collections.

I would have to disagree here, unless the one organization was a worldwide one. (Unless you are only interested in the situation in the US, which would only be a small part of the whole picture.)

Additionally in conjunction with the AKC it has access to all registered Boxer Breeders and has the capability to do a very comprehensive survey.

Except ABC breeders do not register their white Boxers, so the AKC would not have information on them; and, of course, the AKC is a registry body only - they do not have the resources to undertake a study of this type (nor would they assign them to it if they did, that is not their function).

Using all available resources, organizational and private would make the collective data sample larger and more accurate.

Doesn't this contradict what you said above? That data compiled by one organization is much more complete and all inclusive?
:confused:

 

[JulieM]

Actually, No. I said compiled, meaning gathered not only from data it collects itself but from as many sources as possible as long as the collection of said data is shown to follow normal methods of collection.

Oh, I see. So you actually weren't disagreeing with Matt....sorry for the misunderstanding.

As to collecting from sources overseas I say great but it is still useful to have the data compiled by one organization, who it is ... ABC, AKC or other wouldn't be of importance... the correct gathering and compiling of the statistics would be.

Again, it would have to be a worldwide organization made up of members from all of the National Clubs; this would ensure the support of the other Clubs and hopefully encourage more participation of members. I don't think the ABC or the BCC or any existing organization would have the ability to conduct a study of the required magnitude (but hey, I could be wrong.)

I would hope that there would be sufficient breeders who would return a survey that contained questions not just on registered pups/litters but ones that were unregistered. Especially if it was done with anonymity.

Actually, you'd be (unpleasantly) surprised. There are still breeders who claim they have never produced a white puppy, although the routinely breed two flashy parents together.

And, of course, this is all assuming that the National Clubs are interested in the subject at all - which, at this point in time, I feel safe in saying they are not. In the first place, if a Club were going to put that kind of time and money into a study it would be into a more pressing health issue (BCM or AS in North America, for instance). In the second place, as far as the ABC is concerned, there is no reason to do a study - they accept as fact that white Boxers are more prone to deafness than colored Boxers, and nearly a century of breeding has supported this conclusion. They have no reason to think otherwise, and no reason to spend money proving something that has never been contested by scientists or experience.

 

[JulieM]

Actually, I think in most cases they believe they are working for the betterment of the breed. These are the breeders who feel that whites are less healthy/more disease prone than colored Boxers. So while their motivation is misguided, they are at least being true to themselves.

 

[Bumblebee]

I voted no, because I have never MET a white, deaf boxer.

I have actually only met three white boxers thru rescue, but they were not deaf.

I know the rescue organization (Midwest Boxer Rescues) I volunteer for has two white deaf boxer right now, but I have never met them.