Rare Or Disqualifed Colours In Breeds.

[Moselle]

Once upon a time when standards were set it was basically a case of a handful of people stating their own colour preferences and so originated what colours would be accepted and others disqualified. Time has passed and it is a shame that the preferences of those individuals still have to be upheld....time to move on and I am sure that quite a few people would agree. There are such beautiful dogs in both type and conformation but simply because they are born of a colour that is not standard approved they are frowned upon.....

Things have changed over the decades....so what's the hold up? lol

Not in my breed, allowing buffs or even the tricolours to be shown has never been brought into dicussion. The reddy orange coat colour of Tollers makes the breed and is essential to it's job.

I would like to hope that if a buff ever stood foot in a show ring it would immediately be refused and asked to leave.......though they would never get that close anyway as no breeder would ever sell one on the MR.

You are entitled to hold onto that opinion but could it be that perhaps you got so used to seeing reddy orange tollers that any other colour doesn't seem "real" or should I say perhaps does not appear to be purebred even though you know they are ??? Perhaps it is a case of being set in one's ways and becoming accustomed to a particular look.

Are you saying that perhaps a buff is not able to hold its own in doing what is expected of it?

If you knew anything at all about the breed standards you are talking about, you would know that Tollers were originally bred to resemble foxes as that is the colour that ducks are most attracted to when be lured in closer to shore.

So no, the buff colour can not perform its original function.

Thanks for explaining that, TO. I suppose that if you are into duck hunting then it is understandable that you are adamant in tollers retaining that colour. Me thinks duck hunting is a NO NO so therefore buff Tollers would be more than acceptable. Don't quite get what you mean in saying that ducks are attracted to foxes and can be lured closer to shore?

I am not into duck hunting, not enough time in the world, but I am into retaining the breeds hallmark features and its history.

Given that majority of Toller owners over in the USA and Canada still hunting with their Tollers, then colour is still important.

Basically, foxes will play around by the shore by frolicking and jumping in and out of hiding. A ducks natural curiosity takes over and comes closer and closer to the fox which eventually is close enough to grab one, there has been speculation as why they do it, but it came clear that they were attracted to reddy orange dog with white flashing feet/tail tip/face markings. There have been reports of hunters with Tollers having ducks get out of the water and basically follow the dog around.

The only other breed with a similar function, the Kooikerhondji is also red and white. Coincidence? That the two breeds of dogs with similar functions are the same colours just slightly different markings?

Thanks for that info. Just a thought....for those that want to retain the breed's history then why not stick to the original colours and for others that are open to other colours being allowed in the standard but have no interest in pursuing whatever tasks the dogs was originally bred for simply opt for those different colours? Not too many dogs nowadays are used for the reasons intended of yesteryear.

[idigadog]

Phew!! So glad coat colour isn't an important factor in my breed of choice. I'd be up s#@t street otherwise

[Sheridan]

It's a "kerry blonde" That is mismarked kerry not a wheaten. In fact, if you look at the wheaten head it's more irish terrier than kerry. I've posted that before along with pictures of black and tan kerries, tri-colour kerries. The irish, wheaten and kerry are closely related, of course.

There are a number of mismarked kerries and there's a very good article from Dr Neil O'Sullivan (a geneticist and himself a wheaten breeder) about the genetics of kerries and wheatens (can't find the link). Wheatens are actually genetically sable (hence the brown and black colour they're born with) and only one gene turns them wheaten. It's like having a different dog each month until they're around 18 months to two years.

I knew you would know this. :D

Wheaten in my post was actually a reference to that specific colour, I knew they were kerry blues.

I must admit I like them.

Me, too. Merijigs tells me off when I say it's a perfect combination.

[Sayreovi]

Thanks for that info. Just a thought....for those that want to retain the breed's history then why not stick to the original colours and for others that are open to other colours being allowed in the standard but have no interest in pursuing whatever tasks the dogs was originally bred for simply opt for those different colours? Not too many dogs nowadays are used for the reasons intended of yesteryear.

You are kidding right? So you want people to breed yet another breed with no intended purpose (therefore a money making designer dog) other than it's coat colour? How is that any different to what you are accusing us of now doing?

The people who own the breed know why the breed is it's colour and are attracted to that, not the other extremely rare colours.

Ours is a breed that is used as its original purpose.

[Moselle]

Thanks for explaining that, TO. I suppose that if you are into duck hunting then it is understandable that you are adamant in tollers retaining that colour. Me thinks duck hunting is a NO NO so therefore buff Tollers would be more than acceptable. Don't quite get what you mean in saying that ducks are attracted to foxes and can be lured closer to shore?

So we toss out the coat type, the mouth shape, the temperament and any other feature important to duck hunting because its illegal in some States?

Get real Moselle. If you don't care about original function why bother with breeds at all. Or is that the point you're trying to make?

NO WAY...me said nothing about tossing out mouth shape, temperament or other important feature...just coat colour and only because in my case I don't give two flying fruits about the hunting part of things. I own a border collie and a golden retriever, I obtained them because I love the breed....I never had intentions to use my border collie to herd sheep or my GR to chase after shot ducks! AND you know what? I really don't think they miss not having done any of that. Their tail never ceases to wag.

You loved the breed. So you loved what had been developed and refined by HUNTERS over generations but you don't give a toss about all that now. We can forget about what they found important in a hunting dog.

OK, so that soft mouth and high bite inhibition so important in a dog that retrieves game. That's not necessary anymore. We can lose that. The GR's lovely soft mouth and nature won't be needed by families with kids - they'll just have to take their chances.

These dogs won't be spending all day in the field with strange dogs - so lack of aggression isn't such an issue. We can take our chances with that too.

The biddability and trainability in a dog bred to work all day beside and under the direction of the hunter. We don't need that anymore.

Intelligence? The dogs don't need to work out how to get to game, how to find it and bring it back. So we can have dumber dogs now. So those who seek the breed out for obedience training or because they enjoy an intelligent dog can take their chances too.

That lovely wavey coat that sheds dirt and water? The dog's don't retrieve any ducks now so we can have them with 'incorrect coat'. Fluffy dogs with hard to manage coats will be just fine.

You know Moselle, the more I read of your posts the more I can only conclude that you have no genuine understanding of the purpose of setting and adhering to a breed standard. Sadly there are plenty of breeders who feel as you do and the degeneration of breed features and temperament shows that they don't give a toss about the features that actually made breeds what they are.

Oh PF, there you go again. This thread is specifically about rare or disqualified colours and no other canine attribute. No way should we breed for dumber dogs as intelligence is most desirable and so is a coat that sheds dirt for certain breeds in particular. Dogs should be able to retain those very traits they were originally bred for. Colour was my only prerogative here and only for those that do not intend to use their dog for the reason they were "invented" for.

[poodlefan]

Thanks for that info. Just a thought....for those that want to retain the breed's history then why not stick to the original colours and for others that are open to other colours being allowed in the standard but have no interest in pursuing whatever tasks the dogs was originally bred for simply opt for those different colours? Not too many dogs nowadays are used for the reasons intended of yesteryear.

You are kidding right? So you want people to breed yet another breed with no intended purpose (therefore a money making designer dog) other than it's coat colour? How is that any different to what you are accusing us of now doing?

The people who own the breed know why the breed is it's colour and are attracted to that, not the other extremely rare colours.

Ours is a breed that is used as its original purpose.

How many breed features do you consider unnecessary toss out before the predictability of what you're breeding goes out the window.

At what stage does the dog stop being any kind of example of its supposed breed?

[Sheridan]

Thanks for that info. Just a thought....for those that want to retain the breed's history then why not stick to the original colours and for others that are open to other colours being allowed in the standard but have no interest in pursuing whatever tasks the dogs was originally bred for simply opt for those different colours? Not too many dogs nowadays are used for the reasons intended of yesteryear.

I think part and parcel of having and loving a particular breed is the hallmarks that the breed comes with. Otherwise, you may as well just opt for a crossbreed. If you took traits, such as the toller colour - which is there for a reason, as was stated - then why bother. It would be, for me, like having a wheaten that doesn't have a correct coat. If it doesn't have a correct coat, then it's harder for the dog to do its job. You may not think that job is important but it doesn't behoove someone who is supposedly a breed afficionado (and maybe you're not but I'm doing you the courtesy), to dismiss the entire reason for the breed's development.

[Silvawilow]

Moselle - for the love of dog - CROP YOUR REPLIES - we don't need to read the ENTIRE conversation if it's no longer RELEVANT.

I have a Aussie with a white face and white body splashes (big no no) and he's deaf in one ear. We've also discovered he can basically walk right up to a mob of sheep and they don't react at all, where as my red merle Aussie steps into the pen and already the sheep flick their ears acknowledging her presence.

Edited November 10, 2010 by Silvawilow

[poodlefan]

Oh PF, there you go again. This thread is specifically about rare or disqualified colours and no other canine attribute. No way should we breed for dumber dogs as intelligence is most desirable and so is a coat that sheds dirt for certain breeds in particular. Dogs should be able to retain those very traits they were originally bred for. Colour was my only prerogative here and only for those that do not intend to use their dog for the reason they were "invented" for.

You're the one who said you didn't give a toss about the hunting side of things Moselle. In some breeds such traits include colour.

The fact that you don't think a breeds' original purpose matters doesn't mean that's the case.

I can absolutely guarantee in the case of the SBT that colour didn't matter much at all. To see breeders now breeding for it runs contrary to the original purpose and intent of the breed and the breed is suffering as a result.

Did you never consider that GRs and Border Collies are the colours they are for a reason?

Edited November 10, 2010 by poodlefan

[Moselle]

Oh PF, there you go again. This thread is specifically about rare or disqualified colours and no other canine attribute. No way should we breed for dumber dogs as intelligence is most desirable and so is a coat that sheds dirt for certain breeds in particular. Dogs should be able to retain those very traits they were originally bred for. Colour was my only prerogative here and only for those that do not intend to use their dog for the reason they were "invented" for.

You're the one who said you didn't give a toss about the hunting side of things Moselle. In some breeds such traits include colour.

The fact that you don't think a breeds' original purpose matters doesn't mean that's the case.

I can absolutely guarantee in the case of the SBT that colour didn't matter much at all. To see breeders now breeding for it runs contrary to the original purpose and intent of the breed and the breed is suffering as a result.

Did you never consider that GRs and Border Collies are the colours they are for a reason?

Did I not also say that a dog should retain the very traits they were originally bred for? As I said, there are alot of people who would love for certain colours to be allowed in their breed of dog....and if colour takes away from what a dog was originally bred for...well, that comes down to what the person expects of that dog....if you, for instance, do not intend to take your dog hunting, then you are not going to be too concerned if other colours are allowed in the standard? People who want to use their dog for a particular reason can simply stick to the colours that work best. It should be a personal decision....maybe introduce another standard which allows for other colours to be shown in a class amongst themselves instead of disqualifying them altogether. The only difference would be in the colouring not the traits of the dog.

Edited November 10, 2010 by Moselle

[poodlefan]

Did I not also say that a dog should retain the very traits they were originally bred for? As I said, there are alot of people who would love for certain colours to be allowed in their breed of dog....and if colour takes away from what a dog was originally bred for...well, that comes down to what the person expects of that dog....if you, for instance, do not intend to take your dog hunting, then you are not going to be too concerned if other colours are allowed in the standard? People who want to use their dog for a particular reason can simply stick to the colours that work best.

You seem to be making an exception for colour. I don't.

My Whippet will never course hares. Colour is not an issue in his breed but I don't think I should be disinterested in his gait, his topline, his dentition and his soundness because he'll never fulfill his original function.

[Janba]

Did you never consider that GRs and Border Collies are the colours they are for a reason?

Australia is the only country that restricts border collie colours and the markings you see in the show ring are purely fashion. BCs have to have some white on them but the patern is not important. Everywhere else in the world they can be any colour and most other countries also accept short coats.

[poodlefan]

Did you never consider that GRs and Border Collies are the colours they are for a reason?

Australia is the only country that restricts border collie colours and the markings you see in the show ring are purely fashion. BCs have to have some white on them but the patern is not important. Everywhere else in the world they can be any colour and most other countries also accept short coats.

That fact that the standard doesn't say "any colour or colours acceptable" suggests that colour has some role to play. I'm guessing visibility while working is part of that equation?

[Moselle]

Did I not also say that a dog should retain the very traits they were originally bred for? As I said, there are alot of people who would love for certain colours to be allowed in their breed of dog....and if colour takes away from what a dog was originally bred for...well, that comes down to what the person expects of that dog....if you, for instance, do not intend to take your dog hunting, then you are not going to be too concerned if other colours are allowed in the standard? People who want to use their dog for a particular reason can simply stick to the colours that work best.

You seem to be making an exception for colour. I don't.

My Whippet will never course hares. Colour is not an issue in his breed but I don't think I should be disinterested in his gait, his topline, his dentition and his soundness because he'll never fulfill his original function.

Yes, colour is the only exception that I am making. I too place importance in a dog's gait, topline, bite and soundness. Colour doesn't affect the soundness of a dog.

[poodlefan]

[

Yes, colour is the only exception that I am making. I too place importance in a dog's gait, topline, bite and soundness. Colour doesn't affect the soundness of a dog.

In the case of dilutes, it can.

[Sayreovi]

Did I not also say that a dog should retain the very traits they were originally bred for? As I said, there are alot of people who would love for certain colours to be allowed in their breed of dog....and if colour takes away from what a dog was originally bred for...well, that comes down to what the person expects of that dog....if you, for instance, do not intend to take your dog hunting, then you are not going to be too concerned if other colours are allowed in the standard? People who want to use their dog for a particular reason can simply stick to the colours that work best. It should be a personal decision....maybe introduce another standard which allows for other colours to be shown in a class amongst themselves instead of disqualifying them altogether. The only difference would be in the colouring not the traits of the dog.

Do you not get that some breeds colour IS one trait of the dog?

I hope that people like you stay out of my breed, so it can continue to function the way it has for many many years and there is no chance of people trying to make a quick buck by basterdising the breed with inferior quality dogs of disqualified colours.

[raz]

You are kidding right? So you want people to breed yet another breed with no intended purpose (therefore a money making designer dog) other than it's coat colour? How is that any different to what you are accusing us of now doing?

Excellent point. My terriers will never do what they were intended for but I would hate to think someone might be out there wanting a colour not in the standard just because it's 'rare' to have one with pink and green spots and costs a lot more for the fashion conscious who will pay extra for a 'rare' colour. I'll stick with what the standard dictates The standards are all there for a reason.

Was Moselle ever a registered breeder?

[Sayreovi]

You are kidding right? So you want people to breed yet another breed with no intended purpose (therefore a money making designer dog) other than it's coat colour? How is that any different to what you are accusing us of now doing?

Excellent point. My terriers will never do what they were intended for but I would hate to think someone might be out there wanting a colour not in the standard just because it's 'rare' to have one with pink and green spots and costs a lot more for the fashion conscious who will pay extra for a 'rare' colour. I'll stick with what the standard dictates The standards are all there for a reason.

Was Moselle ever a registered breeder?

Geez....I seriously hope not......or if they are, that they are in a breed where ALL colours are acceptable :D

[merijigs]

This looks (to me) like a wheaten kerry blue terrier.

What do you think?

It's a "kerry blonde" That is mismarked kerry not a wheaten. In fact, if you look at the wheaten head it's more irish terrier than kerry. I've posted that before along with pictures of black and tan kerries, tri-colour kerries. The irish, wheaten and kerry are closely related, of course.

There are a number of mismarked kerries and there's a very good article from Dr Neil O'Sullivan (a geneticist and himself a wheaten breeder) about the genetics of kerries and wheatens (can't find the link). Wheatens are actually genetically sable (hence the brown and black colour they're born with) and only one gene turns them wheaten. It's like having a different dog each month until they're around 18 months to two years.

This is an (in)famous photo of incorrectly coloured Kerry Blue Terriers. As Sheridan said, Kerries, SCWTs and Irish are quite closely related but are also distinclty different in coat type, texture, colour, head and body shape and temperament.

One of the most amusing questions I've ever been asked about my Kerry Blues is "do they come in any other colours?" Duh, NO.

The soft, wavy slatey blue-grey coat is a hallmark of the breed, a distinctive feature which cannot be compromised. Oh and BTW the Kerry standard states that the nose and nails must be black and that the gums and roof of mouth must be darkly pigmented. Every Kerry Blue Terrier has a Black nose.

[Vickie]

Did you never consider that GRs and Border Collies are the colours they are for a reason?

Australia is the only country that restricts border collie colours and the markings you see in the show ring are purely fashion. BCs have to have some white on them but the patern is not important. Everywhere else in the world they can be any colour and most other countries also accept short coats.

That fact that the standard doesn't say "any colour or colours acceptable" suggests that colour has some role to play. I'm guessing visibility while working is part of that equation?

I doubt it. I agree with Janba, it is fashion & nothing else. The aust standard does not even make genetic sense!

If visibility were a serious & valid factor:

cream kelpies would be allowed, since they are the same colour as re red BC's (allowable)

other countries would have the same limitations of colour

there would not be so many outstanding mostly white dogs both here & overseas

same with ears, fashion & nothing else. Just something somebody decided way back when & it stuck