Stafford Breeders

[ellz]

It depends entirely upon what the standard says and the genetics for the breed.

Blue staffords CANNOT have a black nose. It is genetically impossible.

The breed standard for ALL colours calls for a black nose. It doesn't say dark, almost black or anything else...it says BLACK.

If you have a colour that CANNOT have a black nose, then it DOESN'T fit the standard and no amount of twisting, turning, reshaping or arguing is going to make that happen. So "technically" if you want to get REALLY pedantic, a blue Stafford is NOT a Stafford it is just a dog with blue hair and a blue, grey or if they're lucky, slate coloured nose.

[blacklabrador]

Just let your friends know there are no 'rare' colours in Staffords, they shouldn't pay more for any colour. Stay clear of such 'breeders'.

They ended up with a little black brindle boy. He's very cute. He's already been over for socialisation with my crew.

[Eileen]

If you have a colour that CANNOT have a black nose, then it DOESN'T fit the standard and no amount of twisting, turning, reshaping or arguing is going to make that happen. So "technically" if you want to get REALLY pedantic, a blue Stafford is NOT a Stafford it is just a dog with blue hair and a blue, grey or if they're lucky, slate coloured nose.

But how can you reconcile that in the same breed standard, blue is listed as an acceptable colour?

[peibe]

Selling a dog for more due to its colour helps promote that colour as being rare and as others have said, makes Jo Blow BYB in training think he can make money selling dogs

If breeders are doing this what hope has anyone got on educating everyone else that profiting on colour is wrong

Set an example please

[ellz]

If you have a colour that CANNOT have a black nose, then it DOESN'T fit the standard and no amount of twisting, turning, reshaping or arguing is going to make that happen. So "technically" if you want to get REALLY pedantic, a blue Stafford is NOT a Stafford it is just a dog with blue hair and a blue, grey or if they're lucky, slate coloured nose.

But how can you reconcile that in the same breed standard, blue is listed as an acceptable colour?

It is incredibly ambiguous.

Blue may well be an accepted colour, but the standard still calls for a black nose and this is impossible. The standard was also written in the days prior to knowledge of colour inheritance. What NEEDS to be done is for the country of origin clubs (ie those in the UK and the Kennel Club) to address this and either alter the standard for pigmentation OR remove the colour from the list of acceptable colours.

As the standard that we use now states, nose colour must be BLACK. If something doesn't have a black nose, then no matter how else you look at it...it is not correct.

Not me saying it.....just plain fact.

[ellz]

Should add too that the Stafford standard was also written in the days when breeders thought that the black/tan would "take over" and sully everything. They didn't know back then that black/tan isn't actually a colour. Simplified, the tan comes from a tan points "gene" and is a recessive that must be on both sides of the pedigree to appear (same with liver really). And they didn't know then either that they were in more danger of getting black/tan from breeding two red smuts together than just about any other colour combination.

Most other breed standards have evolved with the times. The Stafford is one of the most historically "true" standards that exists today. Rightly or wrongly, it is in black and white and hasn't been changed for many decades.

[GRLC]

I am so shocked that so much emphasis is put on about a dogs colour that is listed as a acceptable colour in the breed standard.

I have a blue and white pied girl who has been our best friend and companion for 9 years now , she was purchased as a companion, purchased because she was the right puppy for us and not based on colour . She is desexed and does not have any health problems . She is our angel and we wouldn't swap her for the world . To state that dogs of this undesired colour are "vermin " and imply that they are less of a dog because of it , is just wrong . I'm very disappointed!

However i don't agree with the amounts they are charging for a Blue as it is dead obvious they are breeding for money and not to better the breed.

[Sandra777]

Blue may well be an accepted colour, but the standard still calls for a black nose and this is impossible. The standard was also written in the days prior to knowledge of colour inheritance. What NEEDS to be done is for the country of origin clubs (ie those in the UK and the Kennel Club) to address this and either alter the standard for pigmentation OR remove the colour from the list of acceptable colours.

Sorry Ellz, but breeders in 1949 fully understood that blue with a black nose wasn't possible. Marion Forester spent much of her breeding career trying to recreate her foundation bitch Moti who was a blue - so this makes most of the original foundation stock of Australia descended from a blue too. She corresponded with many of the top breeders in the UK between the 1950's & 1980's so had a reasonable grasp on their thoughts. She told me many times that blue with a dark slate nose was what was intended and required. A very prominant NSW kennel I believe you had dealings with was also founded on a blue bitch. Some of the prominent breeders in the mid 1950's onwards in the UK also housed a blue or two, but back in those days it was the quality of the dog that counted and if it happened to be DARK blue with a slate coloured nose this was considered just another fault, like a dodgy ear, light eyes or any other cosmetic fault.

Problem is of course now that it is the colour that is important and not the dog.

[ellz]

Maybe so, but the fact STILL remains (and therein lies the problem) that the breed standard calls for BLACK PIGMENT and this cannot be achieved with a blue coat.

Doesn't matter who has tried or what they have done, how you squint your eyes, whatever faces you pull or no matter how much justification or how many excuses are given. Until the standard is changed the blue is still NOT correct OR accepted.

And I don't think you can disagree with that.

And yes, I'm well aware of THAT kennel's foundation bitch and I'm told she wasn't of the best quality either!

[ellz]

I am so shocked that so much emphasis is put on about a dogs colour that is listed as a acceptable colour in the breed standard.

I have a blue and white pied girl who has been our best friend and companion for 9 years now , she was purchased as a companion, purchased because she was the right puppy for us and not based on colour . She is desexed and does not have any health problems . She is our angel and we wouldn't swap her for the world . To state that dogs of this undesired colour are "vermin " and imply that they are less of a dog because of it , is just wrong . I'm very disappointed!

However i don't agree with the amounts they are charging for a Blue as it is dead obvious they are breeding for money and not to better the breed.

You can be as disappointed as you like. It is my opinion and I make no apologies for it.

Until the quality of the blue, no matter what colour the pigmentation is, is improved and until they fit the standard and are bred and fully acknowledged by reputable, responsible breeders and are not looked upon as a money tree, I won't be changing my opinion.

As I said, IF one appeared in my whelping box, it would be given the same care, love and attention as any other colour, but it would not be registered and would not be sold for an exorbitant price.

[Sandra777]

Maybe so, but the fact STILL remains (and therein lies the problem) that the breed standard calls for BLACK PIGMENT and this cannot be achieved with a blue coat.

The breed standard says nose black. Then the breed standard says faults to be judged according to severity.

To me a dodgy backend, foul head or top line like a camel is worse than a DARK slate nose.

Bad pigment is no more than a cosmetic fault, but the total lack of virtue in the majority of blues is the thing IMO we should be really be making a big fuss about.

Pet owners don't seem to understand that correct conformation isn't just a show thing, it's pretty important for the dog's physical wellbeing!

[ellz]

but the total lack of virtue in the majority of blues is the thing IMO we should be really be making a big fuss about.

Yes and I've addressed this in the other reply that I made to in the post prior to yours.

And I still maintain that until it conforms to the standard, it is still nothing more than a dog that has blue hair.

[Sandra777]

And I still maintain that until it conforms to the standard, it is still nothing more than a dog that has blue hair.

So all the brindles, reds, pieds that have a cosmetic flaw aren't Staffords either? All dogs have faults; NO Stafford "conforms to the standard"100%

[ellz]

And I still maintain that until it conforms to the standard, it is still nothing more than a dog that has blue hair.

So all the brindles, reds, pieds that have a cosmetic flaw aren't Staffords either? All dogs have faults; NO Stafford "conforms to the standard"100%

No, that's not what I'm saying. A blue dog has a particular flaw that is not accepted in the standard, ie a nose that does not correspond with what the standard calls for. NOSE BLACK. That isn't just a cosmetic flaw, it is a genetic flaw.

As I said, IF the standard were changed to allow a slate nose, then that would make things different. But until that happens a blue isn't acceptable in my eyes no matter how it is painted.

[westozmike]

Ok - I will say at the start I know little of breeding and I'm currently researching staffies for a new family pet. I am an experienced dog owner though, of different breeds and some rescued mongrels.

I have found this topic and the SBT breed topic very interesting and informative. Thanks to all the geat contributors. I have the following questions/comments, please forgive my ignorance on some of these:

- Could someone please direct me to a topic, articles, websites (whatever) that detail the potential detrimental health implications specifically for blue SBTs?

- Is there some specific thing I should be looking for in a blue pup which would indicate a potential health implication (directly related to the blue colour)?

- I understand there may be skin and eye problems - but is this not a potential for all staffies? May be more prevalent in Blue (I don't know)?

- If the pups come from a line of blues with no apparent health issues - is this a better bet?

- Is there a difference between a dark blue, fawn blue and a normal blue (other than colour of course)?

- COMMENT: I am totally bemused by the contradiction in the standard (i.e. black nose but blue listed as an acceptable colour). Now forgive my (potential) ignorance here but my limited knowledge of standards suggests that the standard itself (and strict adherence to it) has for many dogs resulted in extreme health issues. I don't believe this is the case with SBTs but I personally would place only limited confidence on a "standard" that is not scientific but rather just a description of physical appearance determined to be appropriate by a club 50+ years ago with limited medical/scientific knowledge compared to today. The contradiction mentioned above is a classic example of this. I'm not suggesting to do away with a standard but surely they shhould be adjusted for modern times and current day knowledge.

- It seems there a few blue champions out there - why is this so if they appear to be so frowned upon?

I am interested in a Blue simply because I like their appearance (I also really like blacks). Not particualry keen on the lighter or grey blues - but the dark blues. Is there someone who could direct me to reputable blue breeders (if there areany in their opinion) in WA?

I have no problem paying more for a blue. We live in a capitalist socienty with a free market and hence price for any commodity is a matter of supply and demand. Having said that I certainly do not want to deal with a breeder who is ignoring the health of a breed/dog purely for financial gain.

Would love to hear some comments/answers on any or all of the above - especially from Ellz

[J.H.M]

hmmm now where did I put my popcorn?

[corrie]

I also have a question relating to the blue colouring. I have heard of other breeds in the dilute colours having Coat Dilution Alopecia and whilst it stands to reason that this could occur in a dog of any breed with a dilute coat, how common is it with blue Staffords?

[Sandra777]

- Could someone please direct me to a topic, articles, websites (whatever) that detail the potential detrimental health implications specifically for blue SBTs?

Google dilution alopecia. Dilute is dilute is dilute, the breed is irrelevant.

IMO the biggest implication is that once you breed for the colour of the coat you are automatically relegating far more important points further down the list when choosing breeding stock. Important points such as general health issues (heart, allergies, demodex), correct conformation (which is important for the dog to live a normal life), good temperament, correct breed type (which is important only in so far as most people like their chosen breed to actually LOOK like their chosen breed).

The biggest problem with the majority of blues is they are actually really poor examples of the breed and many of them are physically unsound.

- Is there some specific thing I should be looking for in a blue pup which would indicate a potential health implication (directly related to the blue colour)?

Yes, it is NOT bred from generations of blues.

- I understand there may be skin and eye problems - but is this not a potential for all staffies? May be more prevalent in Blue (I don't know)?

Skin issues - see above. Dilute Alopecia won't occur in non-dilutes. Ethical breeders don't breed from dogs with major skin issues so this is virtually eliminated buy dealing with an ethical breeder regardless of colour.

Eye? Never heard of this one being directly related to blue. Hereditary Juvenile Cataract is a potential problem in all Staffords which haven't been DNA tested clear. PHPV & Distichiasis are also major issues in the breed and are potential problems in all Staffords full stop since there is no DNA test and no clear mode of inheritance has been proven.

- If the pups come from a line of blues with no apparent health issues - is this a better bet?

Of course, as is the case for any colour. Except for the simple fact that dilute alopecia is more likely to happen with dilutes actually bred from a line of dilutes.

But how will you know? People who breed specifically for blue are well known in the breed to be,as a whole, not well versed on the breed standard or breeding in general. The vast majority of BYBs and/or new comers who have bought off BYBs. There are exceptions to EVERY rule

- Is there a difference between a dark blue, fawn blue and a normal blue (other than colour of course)?

No, they are all dilutes.

- It seems there a few blue champions out there - why is this so if they appear to be so frowned upon?

You would be hard pressed to find a blue (champion or not) which has won under specialist judges or even in particularly strong competition.

In many cases it reflects the basic truth that you can make up virtually any dog in Australia if you try hard enough and in other cases it reflects the fact that some judges, understanding the truth of genetics will reward a dog which is actually a good example of the breed but has a cosmetic fault. ALL dogs in the show ring deviate from the breed standard in some way.

Edited January 12, 2010 by Sandra777

[BoStoNmAdNeSs]

Ok - I will say at the start I know little of breeding and I'm currently researching staffies for a new family pet. I am an experienced dog owner though, of different breeds and some rescued mongrels.

I have found this topic and the SBT breed topic very interesting and informative. Thanks to all the geat contributors. I have the following questions/comments, please forgive my ignorance on some of these:

- Could someone please direct me to a topic, articles, websites (whatever) that detail the potential detrimental health implications specifically for blue SBTs?

- Is there some specific thing I should be looking for in a blue pup which would indicate a potential health implication (directly related to the blue colour)?

- I understand there may be skin and eye problems - but is this not a potential for all staffies? May be more prevalent in Blue (I don't know)?

- If the pups come from a line of blues with no apparent health issues - is this a better bet?

- Is there a difference between a dark blue, fawn blue and a normal blue (other than colour of course)?

- COMMENT: I am totally bemused by the contradiction in the standard (i.e. black nose but blue listed as an acceptable colour). Now forgive my (potential) ignorance here but my limited knowledge of standards suggests that the standard itself (and strict adherence to it) has for many dogs resulted in extreme health issues. I don't believe this is the case with SBTs but I personally would place only limited confidence on a "standard" that is not scientific but rather just a description of physical appearance determined to be appropriate by a club 50+ years ago with limited medical/scientific knowledge compared to today. The contradiction mentioned above is a classic example of this. I'm not suggesting to do away with a standard but surely they shhould be adjusted for modern times and current day knowledge.

- It seems there a few blue champions out there - why is this so if they appear to be so frowned upon?

I am interested in a Blue simply because I like their appearance (I also really like blacks). Not particualry keen on the lighter or grey blues - but the dark blues. Is there someone who could direct me to reputable blue breeders (if there areany in their opinion) in WA?

I have no problem paying more for a blue. We live in a capitalist socienty with a free market and hence price for any commodity is a matter of supply and demand. Having said that I certainly do not want to deal with a breeder who is ignoring the health of a breed/dog purely for financial gain.

Would love to hear some comments/answers on any or all of the above - especially from Ellz

One very good source for info on Staffords is Bullbreeds Online. A multitude of threads on health and all sorts of issues and some on blues, but don't expect warm welcoming arms in regards to this. A ton of SBT breeders/judges/owners from all around the world. Might be worth a look for you.

[R00]

It's pretty standard in Great Danes, Harlequins $2,500 and Merle Mantles around $1,200.

I think you'll find in a lot of breeds that certain colours and/or patterns are more popular and call for higher prices and it will continue to occur until people no longer pay Breeders that much money.

Sums the whole issue up succinctly and accurately.