My opinion is still the same - not a matter of the cost it is a matter of the ethics of the RESULTS! I have done my research - I am not DEAD wrong about other breeds. I am not lambasting the test as you suggest. I am however suggesting that the masses are not correct mostly uninformed. I am suggesting to not denigrate the breeders who may decide to not test at this time. Why is the program stopped. Why is the marker the best that can be done? If there is a gene why not continue until the gene is found? Who said it was a SHE?
they should continue further testing, but if the current test for fanconi is reliable, in a breed where it is common, why would you not test for it so you can avoid developing it in the dogs you produce? It's like saying "Other breeds can develop hip dysplasia too why should I screen my dogs for it?"
I just got off the phone with a breeder here in Alberta who, aside from seeming very reluctant to talk to me at all, told me point blank she doesn't believe in Fanconi testing her dogs (!) and said that "when they find the gene, I'll test them." I also asked if they were tested for eye or hip problems, and she said no.
Does anyone have any insight into this bizarre view? I'm a little confused, after listening to other breeders who are insistent on testing their dogs…
Should I take the time to get to know this lady's dogs? Should I walk away?
I guess I'll have to get an out-of-province puppy after all.
Twin Peaks, this was the first post…. indicating it's a "SHE". 
Fanconi is a devastating disease that can stike young dogs. I would not even take a free to good home if it were not tested first.
Yes it is a devasting disease - I agree. in order for prospective Basenji owners to ensure we are purchasing a basenji from a reputable breeder there are many factors to considerl. Testing for fanconi should not be the be all and end all of the considerations. Speak to the breeder about the decision and find out why. If the breeder does not want to discuss then that should be the reason to not consider buying from the kennel…not the fact that the testing is not done. A long time reputable breeder will know if there is fanconi in their line. And can determine from which sires this may have come from. There are ways to know the potential for risk of fanconi.
My opinion is still the same - not a matter of the cost it is a matter of the ethics of the RESULTS! I have done my research - I am not DEAD wrong about other breeds. I am not lambasting the test as you suggest. I am however suggesting that the masses are not correct mostly uninformed. I am suggesting to not denigrate the breeders who may decide to not test at this time. Why is the program stopped. Why is the marker the best that can be done? If there is a gene why not continue until the gene is found? Who said it was a SHE?
Where do you get that the program has been halted? That is a totally incorrect statement and totally not true. Research has continued to work towards finding the gene and will continue. As reported by the BCOA health committee, research continues to find the direct gene test. So, I think you are the one uninformed. And to take this a bit further, if you go to the results to date and look at the results of the over 3600 Basenjis that have been tested, the results are as they would be expected. There have only been an handful of tests where the results care inconsistant with the results of the sire/dam and in those cases retesting is done. Some have shown inconsistances in the parentage of the sire and dam, resulting in test results not being as expected.
And why in the world would anyone continue to breed without using all the tools available concerning health? Why would anyone chance not testing and producing a Fanconi dog? I would certainly question the ethics of any breeder that does not test.
I think the majority of us on this forum are well aware that this is a marker test and have waited many years for a breakthrough for a test of any kind. Responsible breeders take advantage of testing available to them. Anything that helps prevent affected basenjis being produced has got to be a good thing.
I am aware that fanconi can occur in other breeds but fail to see why this makes any difference to Basenji breeders. Nobody is forced to test their dogs, but why wouldn't you want to avoid producing unhealthy dogs.
A long time reputable breeder will know if there is fanconi in their line. And can determine from which sires this may have come from. There are ways to know the potential for risk of fanconi.
You are not very well aware of the facts, are you? If you accept the fact that the Fanconi Gene is recessive, then you can never know when/where it will come up. We have had breeders that for years and years have said they have "no" Fanconi in their lines. When the linkage test came out over 80% of their dogs tested as carriers. The breedings that were done purely by luck, were the clears to the carriers. It was only in the last couple of breedings did the Basenjis start testing as Afflicted and low and behold, they then progressed to have Fanconi.
So your claim that a breeder will know if there is Fanconi is a false statment. Without testing we can only guess based on the dogs we know. And you would only know if there was Fanconi if you kept tract of every single dog, every single offspring and you verified the dealth of every one of these dogs that it was not Fanconi. As we all know, there are still many Vets that do not have a clue about Fanconi and a puppy placed in a pet home could very will have had a Fanconi dog and passed away from Fanconi.
One of the dogs that is from my breeding is tested as affected and will turn 16 next month, he is still not spilling. The kennel that produced him has been breeding for over 30 yrs and never had a dog show signs of fanconi, yet it did occur in at least one dog.
One of the dogs that is from my breeding is tested as affected and will turn 16 next month, he is still not spilling. The kennel that produced him has been breeding for over 30 yrs and never had a dog show signs of fanconi, yet it did occur in at least one dog.
And Yes, I can tell you of three other that I know of that tested Affected and are not spilling, however HAVE produced Fanconi offspring. Should a responsible breeder take that chance… I don't care if you breed 1000 dogs, and produced only ONE Fanconi affected when there is a chance to avoid it is not acceptable.
And just because a dog tests affected, doesn't mean you can't breed him (I use the "him" because I don't personally believe an Affected bitch, even one not spilling should ever be used). If you have an Affected tested male, you breed to clear bitches..
in order for prospective Basenji owners to ensure we are purchasing a basenji from a reputable breeder there are many factors to considerl. Testing for fanconi should not be the be all and end all of the considerations. Speak to the breeder about the decision and find out why. If the breeder does not want to discuss then that should be the reason to not consider buying from the kennel…not the fact that the testing is not done
To be fair, a lot of the threads here on finding a responsible breeder (which to me is different from "reputable" breeder) emphasize exactly that Fanconi testing is the minimum consideration, and that there are, as you say, many factors to consider.
But minimum doesn't mean "least important." To me, there is no reason that a breeder should not want to test her Basenjis unless she is hiding something, blissfully ignorant, or self-righteously sticking to some personal code to the detriment of the long-term health of her line and the breed. I don't really care to hear how the breeder spins her reasons for not testing, when I can just find another breeder that DOES test.
I tested my spayed, pet-only B for peace of mind and am fully aware that there is a 2% margin of error and that this is a linkage test. I'll deal with that. It was a completely non-invasive procedure and cost $65 + postage. It was no trouble for me. Why should it trouble any breeder, who should be held to higher standards?
It was a completely non-invasive procedure and cost $65 + postage. It was no trouble for me. Why should it trouble any breeder, who should be held to higher standards?
BINGO..I so agree with you on that..even if it is not a for sure a 100% test, but rather a linkage test, why not do it and also promote it being done?
If you as a breeder can not afford it, explain to your potential puppy buyers and charge them an extra $65 and have it done.
There are so many stories of families struggling with their fanconi suffering dog..I feel anybody knowing how sad and severe it is would not hesitate on spending that extra $65 to have it done, and if they do, do you really think they will make sure that pup gets all the other health tests and shots throughout its life..Probably not.
I would never aquire a basenji that has not been tested..it disheartens me that breeders that don't test for fanconi has this type of support..sad.
Off of the soap box I go….
Sounds to me like "TwinPeaks" is one of these breeders who think they are above testing their dogs and are spouting off "facts" that sound impressive to justify their actions.
I have another view on this Fanconi testing - and a breeder who elects to not test….Get your facts straight before negatively impacting a Basenji breeder with impecable credentials. The harm you do is irrepairable.
Get your facts straight… the only HARM that is irreparable is the person who doesn't test and produces and sells Fanconi affected dogs due to their lack of diligence. Can you test and still produce... yes, but far less likely. Not testing is irresponsible.
there are many factors to considerl.
Testing for fanconi should not be the be all and end all of the considerations.
Speak to the breeder about the decision and find out why.
A long time reputable breeder will know if there is fanconi in their line. And can determine from which sires this may have come from. There are ways to know the potential for risk of fanconi.
Typing slow.
1. No one said not many factors.
2. Hence it isn't end all be all, but it sure is reason not to use the breeder
3. I don't care why they don't… their reason doesn't hold water. If they don't care enough to test, I don't want their dogs.
3. BS. I don't expect buyers to trust me, I don't expect to trust a breeder. When there are tests to show it, the only one asking for trust is the one who probably isn't trust worthy. You make me think about teenage boys saying don't need condom, will withdraw before orgasm. Yeah, right. And sorry but been a breeder for over 20 yrs... most irresponsible breeders blame anything that crops up on the other person's stud or bitch, not their line. Put money where mouth is.. test. So simple it makes you feel faint.. test.
Sounds to me like "TwinPeaks" is one of these breeders who think they are above testing their dogs and are spouting off "facts" that sound impressive to justify their actions.
Or buys from breeder who hoodwinked about no need and convinced it is the uneducated who think it necessary.
Interesting. The 'reputable' breeder being discussed is from Alberta, Twin Peaks is from Alberta and Twin Peaks is justifying irresponsible (IMO) breeding pactices. Any bets these folks are one and the same?
Interesting. The 'reputable' breeder being discussed is from Alberta, Twin Peaks is from Alberta and Twin Peaks is justifying irresponsible (IMO) breeding pactices. Any bets these folks are one and the same?
I don't think this is the same person, only because there is another thread that is about finding a breeder and "Twin Peaks" says that he/she purchased from the reputable breeders.. but I could be all wrong on that.
Bottom line is that if you don't test, you don't know. You can pull that blanket over your head all you want and discount testing for whatever reasons and/or excuses… but you can never as a responsible breeder claim that you have done your very best for the breed if you do not test. And take that into account with temperament/conformation
I don't want to enter into this discussion as it's all been said before in other posts.
However, Twin Peaks - I am an ex-breeder who has not had any incidence of
Fanconi in my line in which most of the dogs are personally known to me (apart from a dog I used who goes back to an overseas line - long defunct I believe).
But a bitch from my last litter tested as a Fanconi carrier (since I've tested Father clear, Grandmother Carrier - mother was deceased) so obviously I had been lucky all those years that I must have always had carrier/clears). So no breeder can say that as they've not had fanconi, they don't need to test!
Another factor is that it is a mutant gene and so theoretically could turn up at any time.
The other thing - someone (?MacPack) said that humans can have Fanconi too - Dr Gonto confirmed that it is a different disease and not related to Fanconi in dogs.
I can't understand the attitude. can selling basenji puppies really be a business? I mean, it's not like they are the most popular dogs in the world. I would assume that most breeders run the risk of not finding owners for their puppies if they breed. I know that would be a concern here in the DR, just not that many people want a Basenji, and those that do, most of them I would give a basenji to, because they really only want them cause they are cute, don't really know anything about them, you know, so I would imagine breeders to be more than willing to do all the testing and have a nice open attitude to a possible buyer, and even more if you have that many puppies available
Interesting. The 'reputable' breeder being discussed is from Alberta, Twin Peaks is from Alberta and Twin Peaks is justifying irresponsible (IMO) breeding pactices. Any bets these folks are one and the same?
LOL claims bought from REPUTABLE breeder elsewhere, but ahem.. not so much:
TwinPeaks
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: albertaHello Brianne,
There are no breeders closer to Edmonton than Shamaron Basenjis. I would like you to know that over 14 years I have had 3 basenjis from Shamaron basenjis. All the dogs turned out to have fabulous temperments and lovely confirmation.tanza
With just a bit of research, the sire of the litter they have on their website shows that the sire or dam is not tested and comes from a Fanconi line on the bottom side through Changa Gala Celebration, with not only Fanconi but PRA eye problems in his offspring. Now, I can't say anything about the Dam of the litter, as I don't find the pedigree on Sally's pedigree site, but this kennel has produced a Fanconi Affected in Shamaron's Kofi Utundu and they have breed to lines with much known Fanconi.
Pat Fragassi
And if anyone finds ANY mention of Fanconi testing on their web site http://www.shamaronbasenjis.com/on_puppies.html let me know where I missed it.
To be fair, a lot of the threads here on finding a responsible breeder (which to me is different from "reputable" breeder) emphasize exactly that Fanconi testing is the minimum consideration, and that there are, as you say, many factors to consider.
But minimum doesn't mean "least important." To me, there is no reason that a breeder should not want to test her Basenjis unless she is hiding something, blissfully ignorant, or self-righteously sticking to some personal code to the detriment of the long-term health of her line and the breed. I don't really care to hear how the breeder spins her reasons for not testing, when I can just find another breeder that DOES test.
I tested my spayed, pet-only B for peace of mind and am fully aware that there is a 2% margin of error and that this is a linkage test. I'll deal with that. It was a completely non-invasive procedure and cost $65 + postage. It was no trouble for me. Why should it trouble any breeder, who should be held to higher standards?
So good it needs to be said again!
Wow, folks, I didn't mean to stir up such controversy! 
