ellz

Nothing scientific to offer but my litter of American Cocker puppies had 3 Black/Tan puppies and 2 Black puppies (out of a black bitch with black/tan parents and a black/white dog with one tricoloured parent). The 3 B/T puppies got parvo, the blacks got seedy but not actually sick. The blacks were titre tested a few years later and showed good immunity to parvo, 2 of the B/Ts never showed any form of immunity. Only anecdotal but interesting nonetheless. Never had any experience with Staffords getting parvo but did have a Rottweiler with parvo many years ago. My first experience at dog ownership as an adult on my own and what an experience that one turned out to be.

I love PBGVs. I fell for them when I was working in the States. I first saw them at a dog show in California. And just as I was leaving, one came into the kennels so I missed out on handling it.

Staffords are (according to vets anyway, I've not seen it personally) apparently more prone to parvo as well. I wonder if that is because they carry the tan point gene? I also had a litter of American Cocker puppies (black and tan) that got parvo as babies (despite vaccination) and when older, not ONE Of them retained any form of immunity.

You will find that a lot of the problem with certain breeds and their non-acceptance of colour is that in some cases, they cannot actually pinpoint the origin of the colour in history. Some breeds have therefore questioned the validity of pedigrees and claimed that the "odd" colours (which may still be perfectly beautiful) have come in via infusions of genetics from other breeds carrying the colours. This is one of the leading arguments behind the non-acceptance of the sable colour in American Cockers today. It was hinted at some time ago that another breed was introduced, either accidentally or deliberately into certain pedigrees and this is where the sable (and possibly the merle) genes started to happen. Despite the fact that there were for a few years some simply stunning examples of Sable and Sable parti American Cockers shown, and titled, it is now possible to register them but they are DQ'd from the ring in the USA, Australia and some other countries. But permissible in Canada and the UK. Very confusing. One of my old American imports is the grandfather of some simply breathtaking sable/parti dogs (one is an All Breeds BIS winner in the USA) but he never sired a sable to my knowledge during his stud career in Australia.

Believe me Pippa, there are other threads that have not been railroaded with references to Nazism that discuss these things. If you use the search function it wouldn't be hard to find them.

I find the Bracco interesting (and appealing). At first glance, he looks like he belongs in the hound group, not the gundog group.

I tried that on Ali before I placed her....didn't work on her unfortunately. And hasn't worked on Vanni either. So no more American Cockers for Ellz.

No. Some colours are not acceptable for other reasons, such as because they make a dog more prone to being mistaken for what it is hunting. Or make it blend in too much with the background and make it impossible to find. Or simply because they are recognised as being THAT breed because of a unique colouring or an unmistakeable marking. For example, a Beagle no matter what the main colour is, MUST have a white tip on his tail so that the hunters can see him above the undergrowth. And I believe one of the reasons that white is frowned upon on the throat and chest of Rottweilers is because the white becomes more visible in the dark, thereby making the dog a target for attackers. Don't quote me on that one, the source is possibly not all that reliable. But it does make sense to me.

The joys of colour genetics are that a) what is acceptable in some breeds isn't in others and b) they tend to join up with other recessives which is what causes the health issues in certain breeds. Producing ANY colour isn't an easy matter, considering the fact that colour genetics is so complicated. It can be difficult enough to produce DESIRED colours, let alone NOT produce problematic colours. It is all a matter of the way the dice is shaken and the matching genes are pulled out of the cup. Considering some breeds and varieties have literally THOUSANDS of colour genetic combinations, I actually find your comment a little unfair. Look at breeds which only have a handful of accepted colours, are not from a huge gene pool and yet STILL mismarks and oddities appear. That's how Mother Nature works. Oh and most of my friends with cremellos and perlinos may not have horses with skin issues, but they DO get badly sunburned on the unpigmented skin and that's not something for the average horse owner to necessarily want to, or have the knowledge to cope with either. Even highly marked "solid" colours have those issues, as well as increased risk of mud fever with white marked legs.

I think it really does depend upon breed and colour. The puppy might well be healthy in the nest but that doesn't mean to say it will stay that way. And I'd rather take a gamble and cull a puppy than end up with the next Greyshaft on my doorstep. That would really just be my luck!

Exactly and I wonder how many of the people who are breeding with known issues are truly aware of this? I had an interesting chat with somebody the other day who wanted to use my dog at stud. He had no real reason for wanting a litter, other than that the puppies were cute and he could sell them. Once I explained to him that if he were to breed puppies that had issues that were hereditary and could/SHOULD have been tested for prior to birth, he seemed to change his mind. That and the fact that I wasn't interested in one of the puppies and my dogs' stud fee is not cheap (to him and others like him anyway - the almight dollar can be a drawcard but it is a mighty handy deterrent too!).

Not really applicable to the Stafford standard which is really very old and prior the days of knowledge of skin and health issues. Also, remember that the Stafford was very much a "working class man's dog". They were expected to be tough, live tough and not get mollycoddled. If they weren't robust, they were culled. If they couldn't do their job, they were replaced.

Stunning!! does remind me of a thick set kelpie though. Doesn't look anything at all like my Kelpie! But mind you, doesn't look a lot like my Staffords either! Can't find the photo I'm looking for at the moment, but I'm sure I have it here somewhere so I'll keep looking.

This is only a puppy of course, I'm trying to find a photo I had of a cracking black/tan dog.

Thanks for that huga, I'll do that. I've seen a couple of entry-level Nikon DSLRs that look quite promising. One of the camera shops in Hobart usually has a couple on display so next time I'm in town I'll toddle in and do some camera-groping there! I should mention that I have difficulties holding onto some things and using buttons and dials because of arthritis in my thumbs and wrists so ergonomic type stuff that wouldn't bother a lot of people can wreak havoc with me.

Don't bet on it....at 3 months it is quite possible that the stress and flight COMPLETELY turned her hormones OFF!! Good luck, I hope she starts cycling for you but if you haven't seen a season at 20 months and she has been here since 3 months, I'd be thinking a visit to a repro specialist may be in order before it is too late altogether.

Liver and blue wouldn't see the light of day here. From what I've seen of those colours, aside from the risks of health problems which are increased because of dilute gene alopecia, no matter what lines they are from, they generally are not of decent quality and I personally wouldn't want my prefix associated with them. Fawn and black/tan....well......a lot would depend upon quality. Fawn I'm less keen on, so would probably be desexed and placed. Black/tan....as long as you know where it is coming from in the pedigree, really there isn't a lot to fear. To be honest, I think black/tan appears more often than many breeders let on.

Well....black/tan is not terribly difficult a lot of the time....watch out for smuts or black/brindles with "pencilling" in the areas where tan occurs. The pencilling is sometimes referred to as sable in some breeds. Smut patterning is "reverse" tan points and requires the tan point gene as the "on/off" switch. Breed two smuts together or black/brindle offspring of two smuts together and start praying when those puppies arrive!!!

Thank you all for your input. I've had another play with BOTH cameras...and I have to say that I'm still leaning towards Pentax. There are just certain things about it, the way it feels in my hands and that kind of stuff that is influencing me. I also visited the forums that Rappie mentioned and did a lot of reading and have done a heap of comparisons online at quite a few different sites. All of my questions and concerns have been answered, or at the least met and thus far for what I'm wanting, the Pentax does come out slightly in front. That said....I've also been pointed towards a different version of the Pentax which may be more suitable. One of the major differences seems to be taking video and that doesn't bother me because I don't want to take video. I've been put onto a very very good, reliable and CHEAP source for lenses as well and have also been pointed towards a supplier for the camera itself who is buying in bulk and the cost of the new camera (with 2 lenses) isn't that much more than the all-up cost for the used Canon and then saving to buy a new lens. And as has been pointed out....if I don't like the Pentax or I find it isn't suitable, then I can always sell it and the place I would probably purchase from, will allow trade-ins and upgrades at competitive prices on other models and brands. So...for now, that's where I'm at. I really did like the feel of the Pentax and I'm still liking the photos that I take with it. But of course, all is a moot point because I'm still saving. Something else may come along during the timeframe that I'm working towards. So I've kind of decided, but am flexible (and still learning and researching) for now.

How old was she when she was imported? Long airline journeys and stress can sometimes play a major part on bitch cycles. I had an American Cocker bitch who was in full standing heat when she left home and by the time we arrived at the stud dog's home, she was out of season. And that was only around 6 hours including flight and car travel in both directions. I ended up leaving her there and she came back into season about 3 months later.

She's playing you! She knows that if you are talking on that thing in your hand and she barks, she will get INSTANT attention. You've seen yourself what the response is if you shut her in another room so that is your answer IMO.

I had a Stafford bitch that was racist, sexist AND bigotted!! She only ever really hated ONE breed/gender/coloured dog with a passion and that was a red male Boxer. It could be any other colour or gender, even red bitches were ok. But show her a red Boxer dog and she turned into a snapping, snarling lunatic. I never knew why and could never get her out of it.

1. There is no such thing as an ENGLISH Staffordshire Bull Terrier 2. There is no sucht thing as a Staffordshire Terrier. The breeds are Staffordshire BULL Terrier and AMERICAN Staffordshire Terrier 2. It does not make you tough if you own one. Balls are grown and attached not purchased. 3. There is no such thing as a pure black Stafford 4. Staffords make very poor "guard dogs". They do however make very good "watch dogs" because they will happily watch a burglar walk away with your TV and DVD and more than likely hop in the car with them.

Tasmania is nice to visit but we don't have great dog show facilities. Our Hobart base is at the showgrounds which we are leasing from the RAS. We have good ring facilities outdoors with one permanent ring and room for two other outside rings. We have benching facilities that are functional but very spartan. There are canteen facilities but due to health regulations, these are only able to be used for basic canteen provisions so most clubs now engage separate food caravans to provide catering. We also have an indoor area that is completely enclosed and large enough for 3 rings for inclement weather. That's pretty much it. Other shows are held down south at council grounds at Pontville (shared by horse people). There are nice permanent rings set up with parking on three sides and room for gazebos and tents. There was a canteen/office area which was burned to the ground. Work is commencing soon on a replacement. There is a large shed nearby that is occasionally used during inclement weather but it isn't big enough for an entire show. Huon Showgrounds is another nice venue.....or it is now but not so sure what it will be like when the beautiful shady trees are removed. There are three lovely, landscaped permanent rings as well as a small canteen and secretary's office there but no provision for inclement weather. I've not shown at Campbelltown yet, but it is just a showgrounds at this point in time, no actual dog show facilities as such. Churchill Park in Launceston is part of a sporting complex. Haven't been to Devonport for a long time, there was never much there by way of dog show facilities. Ulverstone is another I haven't been to. flatchat can probably fill more in here, Ulverstone is I believe her club! There used to be a shed for benching in as well as the sheep pens that were well utilised as kind of separate "apartments" and quite useful for people with small children. Burnie has a couple of permanent rings and a large shed for benching. I do remember one show some years ago when the weather was particularly bad and the benches were pushed aside and one small ring was operating inside the shed. That was fun.....NOT!!!! Oh and Longford Showground has a shed and room for a few rings. So pretty much not a lot of dog facilities for show purposes. But if you want to talk about scenery.....well.....that's an entirely different thing altogether and we would rival just about any other place in Australia for beauty!

The thing about the breed standard is that it was written a VERY long time ago and has had minimal changes as the breed and knowledge has evolved. For example, the black/tan being highly undesirable came about back when it was feared that if it were allowed, it would take over and bring with it the type which came from the Manchester Terrier (one of the terriers used to introduce the "terrier" part of the original "bull and terrier" that was the breed). Now of course, it is understood that black/tan is not a colour, it is a pattern and it is a recessive so both parents must carry the gene to express it to their offspring. Therefore it could only have "taken over" if it was bred with a lot. The blue was introduced into the breed many, many years ago as well and it wasn't then understood that being a dilute, it would never carry the black pigmentation. The best a blue can ever have is dark slate eye rims, noses, lip and mouth pigmentation and nails. But the standard has never been adjusted accordingly. Why? Well lots of assumptions....either the powers-that-be don't want to accept lighter pigmentation or they don't want to accept the blue colouration. My own personal feeling is that any colouration that runs the risk of bring health issues with it, has no place. Dilute gene alopecia is common in blues, livers and other dilute colours in most breeds (including Staffords) so I think that to encourage it in the breed could see it spilling over into the other colours as well if the pedigrees are mixed too much. And from a breeder/exhibitor point of view....to be honest....I personally would have trouble working with somebody who was seriously dabbling in the colour for now. If the standard were changed and slate noses were to become acceptable, I'd still have reservations but would be more open to consideration of the colour IF the quality were apparent in other areas of the dog. And I have absolutely ZILCH respect for people who will deliberately breed blue to blue and sell ALL of the resulting offspring for more than pet price on MR.