Anybody had experience with this problem in a pup ?
If so,did you give the pup a chance ?
Just thought that i would bring it up as there is many who would not recognise the problem & cull. Bit of an eyes up to those who may come across it in the future to give the pup a chance.
Only come across it once,so my opinion is not so much concrete.
Swimmers are not genetically-defective; the condition comes about because of ownership ignorance/laziness, not anything wrong with the pup. This means anyone who "culls" a pup over this is a retard twice over as a dogman, first by creating the situation through poor whelping protocol, and then by not understanding WHY the situation happened in the first place. Plainly and simply, the condition of "swimming" happens generally in smaller litters, and generally in whelping pens with no bedding, which creates a combination of factors:
- The pup get too fat by having too much to eat;
- There is no traction for the pup to stand up on as he develops and tries to learn to stand, so he "slips" every time he tries to stand up, and then quickly develops the bad habit of "swimming."
Therefore, swimming is an ownership/kennel mismanagement issue, and is not any indication of a defect in the pup. The remedy to correct the condition is easy as pie, simply by reversing the conditions that created the problem in the first place: 1) get the bitch out of the whelping pen for most of the day, so the pup/s will lose weight (as swimmers are generally hog-fat), and 2) get some bedding in that whelping pen, so the pup has some traction to push off of and "get a leg under him." Swimmers generally slip-and-slide on the greasy wood or kennel crate, because the owner didn't have any bedding in there.
If people follow my weaning method, they will never have swimmers. It is only people who leave the mama in there with the pups too long with no break, and have whelping pens with little or no bedding, and are not paying attention to how fat the pups are getting, who suddenly go, "Damn! This pup can't walk!" the next time they bother to take a look at the litter. The few times I have gotten swimmers have always been because I wasn't paying attention and was getting lazy in my care.
Jack
Have to disagree on one part Jack,as i don't believe i am as bad as you say,"all" breeders are.
I also don't agree on reversing the surroundings to correct it. Far from as easy as that,but maybe we both witnessed different conditions.
My problem was noticed before 3 week & 3 week(ish) is my start to letting mum spend more time away,with gates locked. I always use bedding too.
As you said,a small litter don't help. Over heated pen & footing also.
I never said all breeders are bad. What I said was that swimming was caused by kennel mismanagement and a combination of the two factors previously mentioned, and I stand by that statement, even though I have been guilty of it myself.Originally Posted by gabbagabbahey
You can disagree if you want, but you asked for my opinion and that was it.
If it wasn't easy to reverse, then you let it go on until the malady really sunk in.
It's like rickets: it's easy to cure if you're on top of things, but it can be irreversible if you're not.
Again, you have the right to disagree with me, but you asked for my opinion and (based on 20 years of experience raising more litters than 99.99% of any person alive), that is it.
Sounds like I was right yet again, as your pup was fat too.
What do you consider bedding/footing?
Sometimes bedding can be in, sparcely, but if there's not enough of it, the bedding gets pushed to the side, and so the fat pup "swims" in the center on the greasy wood/crate. So, technically there can be "bedding" in there, but not enough to keep the pup from slipping.
Jack
True,you never said all breeders were bad. You just put across that i was pretty much a fool for having a swimmer puppy. Albeit yourself too.
If i left the pup too long then i am pretty sure that this will have been due to the age of the pup & not knowing the problem at that time. I have never been one for interfering for the 1st 3 week,other than a daily quick look,but i do recollect noticing the problem before 3 week.
Did i now what the problem was ? Not until i took it to the vet.
Did i leave it too late to start correcting the issue at around 3 week ?
I would have thought that all pups with the problem will be overweight ?
My post was not to say i am right & you are wrong,or to get into a debate.
Your post was informative,but rather than lay the blame at the breeder,you could have been more constructive in the case
of it happening to others.
This was around 10yr ago so it would be wrong for me to say what bedding i used. Today they have what we call over here a "vet blanket" with shredded waxed paper.
There was a very valid reason for me leaving this female alone & not interfering. It is not an excuse on my behalf,but she did kill most of the litter,leaving 2. I witnessed one event.
We all have different opinions based on our experiences. Although i have never bred as many litters as yourself,i have been around the dogs for a long time.
Of course it would be much easier for me to recognise a similar problem a wee bit earlier & i am more alert to pups weight,footing & temperature in the pen.
If anything,then hopefully it gives others a wee bit knowledge on how to prevent this happening.
Appreciate your input Jack.
You just defined your own negligence sir.
Did I not say that negligent puppy whelping causes swimmers? You just told me that you didn't bother with the pups for the first 3 weeks of their lives "other than a quick look." That is negligence. The first 3 weeks of a pup's life are the most critical, and yet you're nowhere to be found during this critical period.
I advised you that people create the conditions for the problem to exist with their set up ... and I further advised that if it gets really bad, then it's because the breeder isn't paying attention ... and here you are basically admitting that you don't pay attention. And, yes, that has been me on a couple of occasions. We all can be guilty of negligence, can we not? However, you have told me "not paying attention for the first 3 weeks" is your usual practice, but it sure as heck isn't mine.
Now, regarding being a fool, I only applied this statement to someone who would kill a pup whose defect was correctable and was ultimately their own fault. If you did this, then yes you were a fool to do so. I am sorry, but that is my opinion. Therefore, if you killed the pup, then you are guilty of this. If not, then it doesn't apply to you.
However, I absolutely believe that if your habit is "not to look at the pups for the first 3 weeks," then YES you are a negligent breeder. On Day 1, for example, pups may need help because the bitch has bad milk. Other pups may not be able to nurse effectively for the first few days. If you're not there to notice the pups are crying, acting bad, or pushed off to the side, then I very much believe you are negligent.
Instead of getting reactive and defensive, how about a look into the mirror and saying, "Maybe the guy has a point." I mean, seriously, how can you possibly call yourself a "conscientious" breeder in the same sentence you say "you don't even bother to monitor the pups until they're 3 weeks." It's absurd. I am not being mean, I am telling you the truth you asked me for.
My own practice is the exact opposite of yours: my pups sleep in a crate, in my room, and I check them constantly until they're 3 weeks of age, and are able to see and move around on their own. At that point is when I move them out into a starter pen with their mother. I am HANDS ON when the pups are at their most delicate, while you are "hands off" ...
Yes you are debating me, and you are simply wrong. Why should I not lay blame with the breeder, when it is breeder negligence that causes the problem? Would you like me to make up a different reason, or do you want me to tell it to you like it is?
You asked me what caused the condition, and what to do to correct it, and I told you. What else would you have me do?
Although I laid the blame on the breeder, I was being constructive. Identifying negligence for what it is, so it can be corrected in the future, IS constructive. What you need to do is not be so defensive. Your protocol was the cause of the problem. Denial or self-justification isn't helping you understand or correct the problem.
Wax paper doesn't seem to be a good idea to me, as wax is slippery.
Well, I can't speak with authority on your reasoning, but I do know that fat pups and slippery conditions create swimmers, and I also know if it gets real bad then somebody wasn't paying attention, and you have done nothing here but confirm what I have said.
Being "around dogs a long time" doesn't mean much. I know a man who's been in the fastest of fast lanes longer than you or I have been alive, but I constantly had to help him with his breedings and in saving his pups, because of his slip-shod breeding practices. As you know, my greatest experience in dogs is as a breeder, you asked me for my opinion on what causes this breeding problem, and I answered your questions exactly. I am not trying to be mean, but I don't sugar-coat anything either.
I hope, after the sting of truth goes away, that the information I provided does help you.
As Benjamin Franklin said, "Those things that hurt, instruct."
However, good advice can only help if the one asking for it pays attention and listens to it.
Good luck,
Jack
Like yourself Jack,i like to get to the point rather than beat around the bush. I would not be here if i never felt that i could learn something. Whatever you have said is heeded & if logical to me then i hope to take it in. Be that criticism or whatever else. Maybe the one liner i wrote was what you were waiting on. It don't portray the whole picture on myself regarding being negligent,which is your opinion. You then criticise me regarding the 1st few days of a pups life when you are only going off my one liner. I won't say that one liner was a true reflection on me checking on pups daily & i sure won't agree to your opinion of myself based on what i have wrote. That is matterless anyway as i only have myself to please. What i will say is that no one could ever criticise me on seeing any pups which were born here so most things must be good.
Maybe my lack of education don't help in my writing,but hey,i make no excuses.
I may well have let myself down but i do know that once the issue was noted then i responded.
The pup was brought into the house with constant care,massage,etc etc. I learn't a lot in such a short space of time. Made a sock to cover the body with stuffing inside to stop him from lying on his stomach,rubber matting to help him hold his own. I had no one to turn to for advice as no one had seen the problem,but he got there & showed no problems when mature. If not for taking the pup to the vet & getting told the problem then i may well have been that "fool". Sods law,he was confiscated as a young adult. His only other littermate had no problems whatsoever.
I like a dam to be in her own privacy with no distractions. I find it helps,but i would not criticise anyone including yourself
for doing otherwise.
The waxed paper is shredded & i use a thin layer on top of the vet blanket. The vet blanket is ideal for pups in my opinion.
As i said earlier i cannot honestly remember the bedding at the time of the pups problem & it would be wrong of me to say otherwise.
I know only too well that time in the dogs means nothing. It is what you do & learn inbetween that counts. Coming up to 30yr & i don't proclaim to be anything other than what i am & i sure ain't done learning.
I don't breed a lot & there has been no more than 25 pups born here this last 17yr so of course i know i am not always right,but i also know that i do not neglect my dogs be they young or old. Hence my defensive attitude,i took offense of your 1st reply.
I will leave it at that Jack,as i really should not get offended by what you have wrote. One pup in a mans lifetime,which sure
learn't me a lot. Hopefully this thread educates others & they don't end up being a "fool".
Good luck..............
I never understand when someone asks for advice or help, then argue when it is given. it is better for someone just to "think" someone is foolish, than for that person to speak and remove all doubt.
I am sorry, but you are not like me at all, because you have done everything but "get to the point" here. It seems to me that you have been dancing around the point all throughout this exchange. And for someone who "doesn't want to argue," and who "doesn't want to make excuses," that is all you seem to be doing here is arguing and making excuses.
As far as me going off your one-liner, that is all I have to go off, is it not?
If you want to make yourself clearer, then you need to take the time to do so.
Yet still, you have now written a couple pages-worth of self-justification, excuses, and denial ... and yet the net result is the same: 1) swimmers happen because they're too fat and the conditions of the floor are slippery ... and 2) if the "swimming" condition gets to a real critical point, then the breeder isn't paying attention like he should. Swimmers are basically so fat that all they do is "lay there," and when the floor is also slippery, they can't learn to walk properly. Generally pups don't get so fat when there is a lot of pups in the litter, so the condition of "swimming" usually happens in small litters that can nurse all damned day with a free-run at all the bitch's tits. The remedy is what I said it is: remove the mama for most of the day, so the pups don't get so fat, and make sure there is good traction on the flooring so when they try to walk they can.
Now, what is it about these simple truths that you can't comprehend?
If you comprehend them, why do you keep arguing with them?
If you "only have yourself to please," then go please yourself, but if you're going to come here to ask me a question as to the cause/effect of a canine reproductive problem, then at least be dogman enough to take the criticism for your poor practices, if they're what caused the condition, without making such a childish fuss over the simple truth. I am sorry if what I said offended you, but it's the simple truth.
Well, credit to you for at least responding, going to the vet, and trying to handle it once you noticed ... but the point you need to come to terms with is THE FACT that if you would have been paying more attention, and caught it earlier, then your pup wouldn't have been that bad off to begin with, and you could have handled it much easier.
Again, credit to you for trying to help him, but the point that needs to sink in is that an once of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
You say you had "no one to turn to," well how about yourself? When I saw my first case of "swimming," I didn't have to turn to anyone, I knew what it was immediately, and do you know why? Because from Day 1, I have bought many, many vet books to make myself knowledgeable. Therefore, IMO, if you would have been a conscientious breeder, you would have had vet books onhand, and you would have read them, which would have enabled you to have recognized "swimming" for what it is. Knowledge is your friend; the will to GET knowledge is what separates the conscientious breeder from the lazy breeder. That is another truth that too many people don't want to face about themselves: they don't ever bother to read and learn, which is another form of negligence.
Sorry he was confiscated later, and as far as his brother not having the problem goes, I'll bet his brother wasn't as fat as he was either.
Again, here you are "justifying yourself," rather than admitting to your negligence. Negligence comes from the word NEGLECT. Are you trying to tell me that NOT paying attention to the pups for the first few weeks is anything but NEGLECT? Or have you somehow gotten yourself to believe that "not paying attention" = vigilance? Do you believe this contradiction?
You mentioned the concept of "logic" in your opening statement, well I have a degree in it, so pay attention here: Vigilance comes from the word "vigil" which means to OBSERVE or to SEE, which means a "vigilant breeder" is therefore the breeder who SEES and OBSERVES. So how in the hell can you SEE and OBSERVE if you're not looking? A vigilant breeder would be someone who IS THERE and is able to respond immediately to a problem as it is happening, because he can SEE it, and he can therefore correct it immediately. For example, when one of my young pups gets sat-on by the mama and squeals, I am able to respond immediately and save it, because I am right there to SEE and OBSERVE, which again is the definition of Vigilant.
By contrast, the word "negligent" comes from the word NEGLECT, which is someone who doesn't bother to apply the level of care a reasonable person should. You "leaving the mama and her pups alone" IS neglect, yet you are actually trying to convince yourself that this is good practice, when it is NOT, precisely because you cannot SEE what might be going wrong in there with the pups. If that same mama sits on her pup at your place, you are not there to hear the pup squeal, and you are not there to save it when it counts. Your practices = negligence, because you're not even bothering TO SEE what's going on in there. Best practices = vigilance, the very definition of which is to SEE and OBSERVE. Therefore, logically-speaking, you don't have a leg to stand on here. YOU'RE NEGLIGENT. You don't look, you don't see. Vigilant people LOOK and SEE, by definition. There is no person, of sound mental faculties, who can debate the logic of this.
Now then, you say you find leaving the mama and the pups alone "helps" ... it helps what? The only thing it seems to "help" is your puppy problems get deeper and worse than they otherwise would have been. Didn't you just finish telling me that the mama killed all the other pups? And wasn't this post made because 1 of your 2 surviving pups was a bad swimmer? And yet you're going to sit here and self-justify your negligence to me? Wow!
You sir, will never be able to learn or improve, because you think what you do is "perfect," even when faced the lousiest results possible.
Keep your opinions then, and keep doing what you're doing.
Well, I clearly cannot change your mind. And if you lack the will to learn, if you refuse to accept criticism for your practices (no matter how ignorant, ineffective, or poor the results), then you will remain where you are forever.
You are living in denial and self-delusion sir.
Leaving the mama and pups alone for the first few weeks IS neglect, by definition.
Exactly right, you shouldn't have been offended and you shouldn't have argued, because you have turned a pretty simple matter into an infinite digression of excuses and denial.
I find it interesting that you say you only lost one pup in your lifetime ... right after telling me the bitch killed most of the litter ... which sounds like another logical contradiction to me.
Be that as it may, I have spent enough of my time on this already, but I hope this thread really does educate, on many different levels, including on what "negligence" and "vigilance" really mean.
Jack
Word.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote