I have come to the conclusion that there is a lot more going on in dwarfism than meets the eye. It is not a simple recessive. It may be a partial recessive, but, until we have a test for ALL types there is no way of telling. Hence most peoples belief (and mine too) that neither animal should be bred from again. If we had a test, well, it would help, but it is still not that simple.
What about the animals we see who are only partially affected? What about the animals dubbed "minimal" dwarfs, that have some dwarf characteristics? What about the one we call "dwarfy"? With a simple recessive the animal either is or it isn't so you get an animal that is LWO or it is not LWO not halfway (and the characteristics cannot be compared, body pattern is a completely different ball game to actual physical characteristics) So, it becomes obvious that what we are often dealing with is an animal that has more than one type of dwarfism. This would account for people confusion when faced with an obvious dwarf that has only one sort, and is therefore not nearly as "chronic" as a lot of cases we see.
I am pretty sure that the test that is on the horizon (and has been for some time) will only be for one sort of Dwarfism, and, thus, although I am in no way denigrating the effort and importance of it, will not really be much more use than the Sab1 test.
Unless the breeders of dwarfs step up to the plate and do the responsible thing in the face of lack of testing, ie not breed the animals anymore, the problem is just going to go on manifesting itself. It is like haemophillia, you are constantly playing russian roulette with genetics, and, all the time, you are passing on the gene, hidden form view, to suddenly appear a few generations on. Just because it cannot be traced back to you does not mean you are not responsible!
