Does this suggest that we should stop breeding ALL Large Breed dogs, which many/most of our Sporting Breed dogs are considered as being?
No but as most of us breeders have figured out you greatly reduce the risk of producing dysplastic dogs by not breeding those known to have dysplasia, thus eliminating them from the gene pool.
When you look at family histories it's clear that certain cancers occur at alarming rates in some blood lines. Unfortunately most cancers don't appear at an early age, thus if the dog/bitch is of sufficient quality may well be bred many times prior to diagnosis.
Fortunately when cancers typically don't appear until well beyond age eight the dog has already had a pretty full and productive life. It's the equivalent of someone dying at 65 of cancer rather than 90 of congestive heart failure. While we tend to enjoy our grand parents and great grand parents and they truly do contribute to our lives in many ways, their greatest contribution to the gene pool is typically done before age sixty five. The same with dogs living 8 vs 12 years.
I would never breed a dog that had any cancer that can be shown to be heritible, and I would never breed a dog or breed to a dog that comes from a line that is known to produce cancerous offspring at an early age.
To many people breeing is all about producing the next winner, and very few dogs do much winning beyond age eight. Therefore they don't consider it a huge loss for a dog to die at between eight and ten years of age.
To the majority of people who buy a dog as a family hunting companion though there is a big emotional investment in the dog by the whole family and those extra four or more healthy years means a great deal.
As for treatments. I've had a couple of dogs come down with cancer at 12-14. If surgical intervention can extend their lives in a comfortable manner we take the surgical option. I will not however put one through chemo. CR
I know what I would do but what would you do?
