new ruling

North American Versatile Hunting Dog Association Tests

Moderator: Moderator Pack

Re: new ruling

Postby ryanr » Wed Feb 13, 2019 10:30 pm

flitecontrol wrote:
JONOV wrote:
flitecontrol wrote:I'm ignorant about DNA testing, but assume it's to detect genetic defects. If so, have they found any way to predict HD in the offspring?

Its to insure the integrity of a breeding, so no one pulls a Ferrell.


So they can verify that the parents on the pedigree are the biological parents? How many instances of cheating have they found? That's going to increase the cost of a pup significantly I would think.


It's a $55 test right?
Schwarzwald's Hazel, NA 105 Prize 2
Quade vom Buffeltaler, NA 112 Prize 1
ryanr
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 2471
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 8:54 pm
Location: Lehighton, PA

Re: new ruling

Postby flitecontrol » Wed Feb 13, 2019 11:08 pm

Sire and dam, all puppies (lets say eight for average litter) total of ten tests times $55 or $65 = $550 to $650 per litter more.
I've had several really good dogs, but none were perfect. Neither am I, so keep that in mind!
flitecontrol
Master Poster
Master Poster
 
Posts: 350
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 1:16 am
Location: Monroe, LA

Re: new ruling

Postby ryanr » Thu Feb 14, 2019 12:26 am

flitecontrol wrote:Sire and dam, all puppies (lets say eight for average litter) total of ten tests times $55 or $65 = $550 to $650 per litter more.


You're just testing the parents, not the litter. So $110 to $120 and that's simply part of the cost of breeding or if you want, an extra $15 at most per pup in a litter of 8. And once either side or dam are tested, they're tested. It's not something that's done repeatedly.
Schwarzwald's Hazel, NA 105 Prize 2
Quade vom Buffeltaler, NA 112 Prize 1
ryanr
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 2471
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 8:54 pm
Location: Lehighton, PA

Re: new ruling

Postby JONOV » Thu Feb 14, 2019 12:30 pm

ryanr wrote:
JTracyII wrote:This may come back to bite NAVHDA eventually if breeders simply use another registery to register litters. What does it cost to DNA a dog?


I doubt it. And I won't be surprised if you start seeing other registries doing the same. Folks that take their dogs to the Invitational are already doing this anyway.

American Field and AKC have some level of DNA testing. It may be a function of how many litters they breed.

flitecontrol wrote:
JONOV wrote:
flitecontrol wrote:I'm ignorant about DNA testing, but assume it's to detect genetic defects. If so, have they found any way to predict HD in the offspring?

Its to insure the integrity of a breeding, so no one pulls a Ferrell.


So they can verify that the parents on the pedigree are the biological parents? How many instances of cheating have they found? That's going to increase the cost of a pup significantly I would think.

Reminds me of an instance where someone mishandled funds. The accountants came up with a foolproof way to detect such behavior early on in the future. Trouble is, it was going to cost 100 times more than what a few unscrupulous individuals had been able to get away with before being caught. Gotta weigh the pros and cons.

That's what I don't understand. Are there breeds or breedings where its been a concern in recent years? I've not heard of or seen much that would indicate that it is...But that might be something that's more heard within the breed clubs.
JONOV
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 647
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 1:14 pm

Re: new ruling

Postby KJ » Fri Feb 15, 2019 11:45 am

What is the purpose? Proving parentage? Is it really worth it to make every breeder pay an extra $110 so they can identify the 0.0002% of incorrectly identified parents? Classic case of "managing by exception". And a DNA test verifies nothing unless the parents are also DNA'd and someone is COMPARING the DNA they receive against the parents'. Is NAVHDA willing to do this?

And I just don't see the Ferrell Miller thing being an issue in NAVHDA. Maybe where competition and winning are concerned, but most NAVHDA people aren't wired that way. Most of the people who have bad dogs seem to be OK with it. I think there would be more benefit to the breeds by actually opening up the registry and actually allowed reasonable outcross breeding to some breeds with limited gene pools. Now that ought to ruffle some feathers :shock:
User avatar
KJ
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 571
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2002 4:54 pm
Location: Baker City, OR

Re: new ruling

Postby JONOV » Tue Feb 26, 2019 12:58 pm

KJ wrote:What is the purpose? Proving parentage? Is it really worth it to make every breeder pay an extra $110 so they can identify the 0.0002% of incorrectly identified parents? Classic case of "managing by exception". And a DNA test verifies nothing unless the parents are also DNA'd and someone is COMPARING the DNA they receive against the parents'. Is NAVHDA willing to do this?

And I just don't see the Ferrell Miller thing being an issue in NAVHDA. Maybe where competition and winning are concerned, but most NAVHDA people aren't wired that way. Most of the people who have bad dogs seem to be OK with it. I think there would be more benefit to the breeds by actually opening up the registry and actually allowed reasonable outcross breeding to some breeds with limited gene pools. Now that ought to ruffle some feathers :shock:


Just a thought, the AKC and FDSB have recently introduced more stringent DNA testing requirements, from what I hear. 4th litter for a Dam,5th for a sire with FDSB.

It could well be as a stopgap to keep out puppy mills from defaulting to NAVHDA registry for ease of use.

I know of one breeder that keeps his dogs in filth, and frankly I don't think he has any idea who the daddy is for his dogs. And I doubt he could tell you the names of his females consistently. He has a GSP Pen and a Brittany Pen. I don't know what registry he uses but I know at least two that are registered with NAVHDA, so probably FDSB or maybe AKC.
JONOV
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 647
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 1:14 pm

Re: new ruling

Postby ForestDump » Wed Feb 27, 2019 12:16 am

This is stupid. NAVHDA keeps straying farther from what it was originally supposed to be.
User avatar
ForestDump
Senior Poster
Senior Poster
 
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2016 11:42 pm
Location: Oregon

Re: new ruling

Postby Fun Dog » Wed Feb 27, 2019 12:39 am

I was at the annual meeting and there was no talk of DNA testing.
Dori
User avatar
Fun Dog
Master Poster
Master Poster
 
Posts: 325
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 1:40 pm
Location: Seward, Alaska

Re: new ruling

Postby Deacon » Thu Feb 28, 2019 11:12 am

The real money grab is the regulation instituted last year which requires both the handler, and the owner of a dog, to be members of the International. Prior to this neither the owner, nor handler, had to be a member, but the dog still had to be registered.

As somebody who has spent several years as a test secretary with our chapter, there is no question that a large percentage of NA entries are only there because their breeder asked them to run the test. Many of these people are more geared toward AKC hunt tests, or no testing at all. Now those people will have to factor in an additional $60, or $120 if they have somebody else run the dog, for the test. This is going to hurt the number of entries chapters receive, which will in turn make these tests less feasible for the chapters to run.

I don't recall any discussion on this from the International to the chapters. It was apparently passed down from on high as a new mandate.
User avatar
Deacon
Master Poster
Master Poster
 
Posts: 272
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2011 7:06 pm

Re: new ruling

Postby ryanr » Thu Feb 28, 2019 3:05 pm

Double post.
Last edited by ryanr on Thu Feb 28, 2019 3:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Schwarzwald's Hazel, NA 105 Prize 2
Quade vom Buffeltaler, NA 112 Prize 1
ryanr
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 2471
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 8:54 pm
Location: Lehighton, PA

Re: new ruling

Postby ryanr » Thu Feb 28, 2019 3:05 pm

Deacon wrote:The real money grab is the regulation instituted last year which requires both the handler, and the owner of a dog, to be members of the International. Prior to this neither the owner, nor handler, had to be a member, but the dog still had to be registered.

As somebody who has spent several years as a test secretary with our chapter, there is no question that a large percentage of NA entries are only there because their breeder asked them to run the test. Many of these people are more geared toward AKC hunt tests, or no testing at all. Now those people will have to factor in an additional $60, or $120 if they have somebody else run the dog, for the test. This is going to hurt the number of entries chapters receive, which will in turn make these tests less feasible for the chapters to run.

I don't recall any discussion on this from the International to the chapters. It was apparently passed down from on high as a new mandate.


I actually like that rule and I don't think it's going to hurt entries all that much. Sure some but with my chapter at least we have so many people looking to test any spots will be filled quickly. I'm going to say part of it is possibly insurance related because International's insurance carrier has gotten a little stricter with requirements. All chapter members everywhere must also be members of International, that's a requirement now from International. So anybody looking for chapter help preparing for NA pretty much has to become a chapter member somewhere (we allow you to attend 1 free training and then after that you must join if you want to continue training with us. And many chapters actually charge a surcharge for non-chapter members to test in our chapter (ours is $20.)
Schwarzwald's Hazel, NA 105 Prize 2
Quade vom Buffeltaler, NA 112 Prize 1
ryanr
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 2471
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 8:54 pm
Location: Lehighton, PA

Re: new ruling

Postby JONOV » Mon Oct 07, 2019 12:25 pm

Deacon wrote:The real money grab is the regulation instituted last year which requires both the handler, and the owner of a dog, to be members of the International. Prior to this neither the owner, nor handler, had to be a member, but the dog still had to be registered.

As somebody who has spent several years as a test secretary with our chapter, there is no question that a large percentage of NA entries are only there because their breeder asked them to run the test. Many of these people are more geared toward AKC hunt tests, or no testing at all. Now those people will have to factor in an additional $60, or $120 if they have somebody else run the dog, for the test. This is going to hurt the number of entries chapters receive, which will in turn make these tests less feasible for the chapters to run.

I don't recall any discussion on this from the International to the chapters. It was apparently passed down from on high as a new mandate.

I've heard but couldn't confirm that there was an instance in 2017 or 18 of a dog that DNA didn't check out when it was sent in for the invitational, and the sire was supposedly owned by a senior member of leadership.
JONOV
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 647
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 1:14 pm

Previous

Return to NAVHDA

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest