# Why is white okay in some dogs but bad in others?



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

Some dogs can be all white and be just fine.... but other dog breeds shy away from whiteness because it can cause deafness and blindness. Can someone explain that to me?


----------



## MastiffGuy (Mar 23, 2015)

Believe ones a color and other is a lack of pigment.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

all white is actually light red in most breeds. Bad all white is extreme piebald.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Examples: Bichons, American Eskimos, white german shepherds, etc. They are actually very very light cream. You'll notice they still have black pigment on their nose and eyes.

Piebald is 'true' white. Often solid white dogs that are solid white from being piebald will have pink eyerims (maybe nose). It's the lack of pigment inside the ear that is the problem.


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

I know that white Corgis have black rimmed eyes, a black nose, but the inside of their ears are pink? And their eyes are usually a light grey brown. And too much whiteness on a corgi is a serious fault.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Corgis are Irish spotted. You only see the 'looks white but isn't actually white' in solid colored dogs.

Here: http://www.doggenetics.co.uk/white.htm

At the very bottom there are 'false' white dogs.


----------



## SamiSaysRawr (May 26, 2012)

Being so prone to deafness due to being a fully white piebald was the reason the English White Terrier went extinct. No-one wanted to be involved with them anymore because it was so rampant in the breed. (Although some left the breed due to the cropping ban introduced back then, so that was partly the reason too.)

Most breeds with a high percentage of white have coloured markings on the head preferred in the standard. (i.e PRTs with markings being favoured on the head and base of tail.)


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

Laurelin said:


> Corgis are Irish spotted. You only see the 'looks white but isn't actually white' in solid colored dogs.
> 
> Here: http://www.doggenetics.co.uk/white.htm
> 
> At the very bottom there are 'false' white dogs.


Helpful link. Thanks.


----------



## Mint (Sep 4, 2013)

This is an interesting read on cream/white shibas and why passing on the gene that causes cream shibas may not be the best idea.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

I have no idea how Squash isn't deaf. He's got a very small amount of tan speckling on his ears and that's about it.


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

This whole thought got started when a girl posted a picture of her corgi. We got to talking and she told me that people have told him that he has too much white on him for conformation. (He was a black tri, with too much white on his shoulders, and white above his belly line coming onto the side of his body) I told her it's probably because white is an undesirable trait in corgis because it can cause health problems. And they don't want whiteys or mismarks to become a trend because it can be harmful for the breed in the long run. At least that's always what I was told. She then proceeded to tell me she was going to get him health tested and if he passes his health tests, she'll stud him anyways.


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

But then that also got me thinking about our thread that essentially just boiled down to changing the entire breeding world. Is it worth it to take a breeding dog out of the gene pool just because he's mismarked? Is it that detrimental to the breed?


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Depends on the mismark? Some colors are linked to stuff that's not good. 

Most the time with white you can just breed a dog with a lot of white to a dog with little white and be ok.


----------



## Kayota (Aug 14, 2009)

sassafras said:


> I have no idea how Squash isn't deaf. He's got a very small amount of tan speckling on his ears and that's about it.


luck of the draw... moby was stone deaf and had black ears.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

It really depends on breed. I can only answer this somewhat for the gsd.

White is a recessive gene and it is rare. You get them sometimes through normal litters. These dogs are fine Imo but are not necessarily breeding quality. They certainly are not by conformation standards that say a dog should look a certain way and compared with many other dogs. But to consistently breed white dogs means you get away from breed standards. It means you get away from working ability where to some it is the most important thing in gsds to breed for. Esp. Working lines.

Breeding for colour (matching white on white dogs) can destroy responsible breeding. You can no longer select dogs for health, or for work or for temperament. They are mostly selected for colour. What they are doing is looking for 2 rare white dog from multiple litters, and just breeding it, for colour and nothing else.

They are now registering white shepherds as Swiss shepherds and creating a different breed. That's fine and they can do what they like. Because it's a different breed. Those dogs come from gsd lines too. The only problem is they are taking a very random sample of gsd dogs bred specifically towards something, and breeding on random traits. And then re-standardizing. And to me breeding specifically for colour dilutes any breeding work and goals established initially.


----------



## Avie (Jul 10, 2011)

WesS said:


> They are now registering white shepherds as Swiss shepherds and creating a different breed. That's fine and they can do what they like. Because it's a different breed. Those dogs come from gsd lines too. The only problem is they are taking a very random sample of gsd dogs bred specifically towards something, and breeding on random traits. And then re-standardizing. And to me breeding specifically for colour dilutes any breeding work and goals established initially.


White Swiss shepherds have been a recognized breed for over a decade now. Longer in Switzerland. Moreover, white GSDs cannot be registered as white Swiss shepherds anymore (they could in the past, but the stud book has been closed for a while now). 

Breeding for coat color and temperament that aren't desirable in GSDs is not a problem at all. Like you said yourself, they are a different breed... with a different standard. 

Also, where did you get that white Swiss shepherds breeders are not breeding for health or temperament, lol? 

Alright, white Swiss shepherd owner rant off.  

Back to topic: What Laurelin said, and exactly that. 

In some breeds myths about the color white seem very hard to erase. Taking white GSDs as an example here, and to some extent white Swiss shepherds, some people believe their white color is associated with deafness... making it an argument against breeding for white... when that's not the case at all. Like Laurelin said, they are essentially red diluted into a very light cream and don't have pigment issues associated with deafness. Still, some breeders do BAER tests on their puppies, which is ridiculous when you take into account what I mentioned just now.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

Avie said:


> White Swiss shepherds have been a recognized breed for over a decade now. Longer in Switzerland. Moreover, white GSDs cannot be registered as white Swiss shepherds anymore (they could in the past, but the stud book has been closed for a while now).
> 
> Breeding for coat color and temperament that aren't desirable in GSDs is not a problem at all. Like you said yourself, they are a different breed... with a different standard.
> 
> ...


Well, you are right, they are. But the dogs stemmed from a random GSD sample bred on colour. GSD's stemmed from a deliberate sample mixed dogs bred to work. The different lines have different motives, and the GSD world is also splintering. I am sure they make great dogs. But intentionally bred GSD White litters, (who are eligible i think for swiss shepherd registration-not sure if still the case) were bred specifically for colour, im sure they had some hip-dispatia tests too by better breeders. 

Its basically extremely watered down GSD genetics and bred for colour predominantly. It is what it is. Dogs bred specifically for human niches and looks is nothing new. It happens with most breeds. In fact it is happening with many show-line GSDs too. Now they have to work the standards back up, when they already had them, because they bred for colour.


----------



## Avie (Jul 10, 2011)

WesS said:


> (who are eligible i think for swiss shepherd registration-not sure if still the case)


Like I said, no longer and that's been for a while now. 

The only thing 'watered down' is their coat color, not their health genes (as I assume you're after). White has always occurred in the GSD. It's not like a couple white dogs were taken and used to build an entire population on. For a long time any white colored GSD could be used, and whites were often born from colored dogs. I will say that the breed's gene pool started narrowing the moment the stud books were closed, and that was a bad thing. But then again, I'm against closed stud books in general. 

You can completely disregard 'working the standards back up' because like I said the White Swiss shepherd has different standards and they are already being met. In certain aspects I'm actually of the opinion that GSD standards are lacking, so I'm glad my breed isn't trying to get back there, lol.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

Avie said:


> Like I said, no longer and that's been for a while now.
> 
> The only thing 'watered down' is their coat color, not their health genes (as I assume you're after). White has always occurred in the GSD. It's not like a couple white dogs were taken and used to build an entire population on. For a long time any white colored GSD could be used, and whites were often born from colored dogs. I will say that the breed's gene pool started narrowing the moment the stud books were closed, and that was a bad thing. But then again, I'm against closed stud books in general.
> 
> You can completely disregard 'working the standards back up' because like I said the White Swiss shepherd has different standards and they are already being met. In certain aspects I'm actually of the opinion that GSD standards are lacking, so I'm glad my breed isn't trying to get back there, lol.


I consider GSD lines different breeds anyways. Some lines of GSD's stand out as one of the dogs that are tested extensively on nerve. (important for a powerful breed).
The world of breeding is a mess. So I am not going to say who is right or who is wrong. From what I gathered chosing the right breeder is the key in any case.
IPO and other testing which explores conflicting drives and nerve-of dog, makes them not only more work-able but also more stable in a home environment. This is important for powerful breeds IMO. 

Many lines dont do this. In the end its about the breeder. In the end I wandered too far in bringing up swiss shepherds, but i thought it necessary to answer the question, at least from a 'gsd' perspective. I just explained why they are not accepted in GSD circles. Now your critisism of GSD is completely valid. But I will add the work done by certain reputable breeders, far exceeds work done in the majority of breeds.

The GSD has surely swayed from its initial intended purpose in breeding, and founders aims.

"The most striking features of the correctly bred German Shepherds are firmness of nerves, attentiveness, unshockability, tractability, watchfulness, reliability and incorruptibility together with courage, fighting tenacity and hardness." 
- Max von Stephanitz

“Take this trouble for me: Make sure my shepherd dog remains a working dog, for I have struggled all my life long for that aim.” Captain Max von Stephanitz, 1864-1936

As I delve further into all this, ive realised, only the working lines, are truly keeping with the aim, of what really is a GSD. The rest should probably just rename the dogs something else, but their reputation, is built on the GSD name. And the funny thing, is most people wont even recognise a working line gsd. It looks nothing like the red and black gsd ppl are accustomed to. There is no exact look or colouring because the gsd was never meant to be bread for colour.

Theoretically naturally occurring white dogs should have never been discriminated against. But tell that to the people who run 'conformation'. It was part of the original dogs used to breed the GSD. The problem arises, when you specifically match white on white instead of breeding for temperament. Producing specifically white litters, was indicative of bad breeding in GSD circles. So its partly marketing, partly standardisation of looks, and partly bad breeding who was to blame. There is also a theory about Nazi's somewhere not liking white dogs. Not sure if its true.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

Also white in the doberman is basically albinoism. Its an undesired health problem. Again it depends on breed.

Whereas the great pyranese had to be white. As it blended with sheep. And could be 'part of the flock', grow up with the flock, to protect it. 
Whereas some other herding dogs, need to command respect of the flock, and control the flock to round it up, and be easily identifiable. Those dogs cant be white.


----------



## Avie (Jul 10, 2011)

I actually agree with most of what you're saying, WesS.  

I've never understood where the white in Dobermanns comes from and what kind of white it is. To my understanding, true albinism doesn't exist in dogs. Anyone with knowledge on this?


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Just from wiki:



> In 1976, a "white" Doberman Pinscher was whelped,[8] and was subsequently bred to her son, who was also bred to his litter sisters. This tight inbreeding continued for some time to allow the breeders to "fix" the mutation. White Dobermans are a cream color with pure white markings and icy blue eyes. Although this is consistent with albinism, the proper characterization of the mutation is currently unknown. The animals are commonly known as tyrosinase-positive albinoids, lacking melanin in oculocutaneous structures.[9] This condition is caused by a partial deletion in gene SLC45A2.[10]


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

WesS said:


> Breeding for colour (matching white on white dogs) can destroy responsible breeding. You can no longer select dogs for health, or for work or for temperament.



ANY breed that specifies color in the breed standard is effectively breeding for color.


----------



## Effisia (Jun 20, 2013)

I noticed that white is a fault in Eurasiers, too. Not sure why. I know they bred in some Samoyed towards the end of the breed development, but I'm not sure whether it's because of heath or just looks. Now I'm curious - more questions for my poor breeder!


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

Avie said:


> I actually agree with most of what you're saying, WesS.
> 
> I've never understood where the white in Dobermanns comes from and what kind of white it is. To my understanding, true albinism doesn't exist in dogs. Anyone with knowledge on this?


Just what I heard. There was an albino dog (Lack of pigment-health problem) in the line at some point that was bred back into the breed. Don't know enough about it. Here is a good source of info on a quick google search.
http://dpca.org/albino/albino_about.htm


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Dog coat color genetics to the rescue!

http://www.doggenetics.co.uk/albino.html


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

This is kind of unrelated but I didn't realize Jess had put up all her vintage dog postcards in one place! They've always been really neat. 

http://www.doggenetics.co.uk/vintage/


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

sassafras said:


> ANY breed that specifies color in the breed standard is effectively breeding for color.


I'd just like to expand on this a little bit. If a dog has to be eliminated from a breeding program because it had a mask that was slightly too large/too small for the standard, for example, then that breeder is breeding for color. There are some breeds (mostly hounds I think) that basically allow any color; those are the only breed STANDARDS who can claim they don't breed for color (although individual breeders may prefer specific colors).

It's a shame that dogs who are otherwise sound temperamentally, structurally, healthwise get eliminated from gene pools because a patch of white on the chest or toes was too big. Or because the border between white and dark areas were too smudgy. And don't even get me started on Danes allowing harlequin but not merle (or any of the other unacceptable colors that can come from acceptable colors).

But breeding for color is bad, mmmkay?


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

sassafras said:


> ANY breed that specifies color in the breed standard is effectively breeding for color.





sassafras said:


> I'd just like to expand on this a little bit. If a dog has to be eliminated from a breeding program because it had a mask that was slightly too large/too small for the standard, for example, then that breeder is breeding for color. There are some breeds (mostly hounds I think) that basically allow any color; those are the only breed STANDARDS who can claim they don't breed for color (although individual breeders may prefer specific colors).
> 
> It's a shame that dogs who are otherwise sound temperamentally, structurally, healthwise get eliminated from gene pools because a patch of white on the chest or toes was too big. Or because the border between white and dark areas were too smudgy. And don't even get me started on Danes allowing harlequin but not merle (or any of the other unacceptable colors that can come from acceptable colors).
> 
> *But breeding for color is bad, mmmkay?*


Since this is addressed to me. 

Didnt say that. Your quoting out of context, which is why I did not reply to previous post. I was specifically talking about GSD's and the matter, is highly adressed in those posts as to the reasoning. Another post of great Pyrenees shows how it must be white to perform its function. I was also very critical of much of conformation and many reasons on breeding on just looks instead of function. For example lowered GSD hips, when most tetrapods dont move functionally that way, weather for distance, or speed, or airtime. It shows in their bite work and their jumps.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

WesS said:


> Didnt say that. Your quoting out of context, which is why I did not reply to previous post. I was specifically talking about GSD's and the matter, is highly adressed in those posts as to the reasoning. The next post of great Pyrenees shows how it must be white to perform its function.


Yes I realize you were talking about GSDs. My point is that if white is not in the standard, then even GSD breeders who don't breed white to white ARE breeding for color - not white. And not Panda. And not any other non-standard color. You can't point fingers are people breeding white shepherds and then claim that people not breeding white shepherds aren't breeding for color - they're just breeding for different colors, but they're still limiting their gene pool. 

The idea that health, structure and temperament magically follow color because it says so on a piece of paper written decades ago is laughable. And it's contributing to genetic bottlenecks in many breeds today.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

sassafras said:


> Yes I realize you were talking about GSDs. My point is that if white is not in the standard, then even GSD breeders who don't breed white to white ARE breeding for color - not white. And not Panda. And not any other non-standard color. You can't point fingers are people breeding white shepherds and then claim that people not breeding white shepherds aren't breeding for color - they're just breeding for different colors, but they're still limiting their gene pool.
> 
> The idea that health, structure and temperament magically follow color because it says so on a piece of paper written decades ago is laughable. And it's contributing to genetic bottlenecks in many breeds today.


What you and general public regard as a GSD. And I was critical of conformation. 








This one would lose some points for that little bit of white up top.

What working lines look like. The ones the police, really use...

























































Can spot which looks alike? You are just thinking of this again:








Not the same dog as the first one by the way.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

^^ I'm not sure what that has to do with what I said?


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

sassafras said:


> ^^ I'm not sure what that has to do with what I said?


Maybe his point is that show GSDs are bred "for color" while working dogs are bred with no color preference in mind?


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Also, I am NOT "just" thinking about saddled GSDs. There are several colors allowed in the GSD standard. Just because there is more than one color allowed, it doesn't mean GSDs aren't bred for color. 

I think you're missing my point entirely. If a standard for breed XYZ says that bi-color, sable, and saddled are all acceptable colors - then _every other color_ is not acceptable. And so breeders of XYZs are breeding for color - bi-color, sable, and saddled.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

sassafras said:


> Also, I am NOT "just" thinking about saddled GSDs. There are several colors allowed in the GSD standard. Just because there is more than one color allowed, it doesn't mean GSDs aren't bred for color.
> 
> I think you're missing my point entirely. If a standard for breed XYZ says that bi-color, sable, and saddled are all acceptable colors - then _every other color_ is not acceptable. And so breeders of XYZs are breeding for color - bi-color, sable, and saddled.


"Plain and simple, working lines are bred for their working ability. Dogs are judged for breed worthiness, and breeding partners are selected based on their ability to not only work well, but also to produce strong, balanced working dogs. Rather than looking at angulation or movement or color, working line breeders focus on traits like drive, courage, hardness, intelligence, willingness and overall strength of nerve and temperament. The goal is to produce a dog who will not just prove to be sufficient to obtain titles in herding or schutzhund, but who will excel in a variety of working endeavors. Health is a huge priority for working line breeders because it is necessary for their goals. No matter how excellent the dog is mentally, if he is unhealthy he is useless as a working dog."

Source: http://www.wildhauskennels.com/gsdtypes.htm


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

WesS said:


> "Plain and simple, working lines are bred for their working ability. Dogs are judged for breed worthiness, and breeding partners are selected based on their ability to not only work well, but also to produce strong, balanced working dogs. Rather than looking at angulation or movement or color, working line breeders focus on traits like drive, courage, hardness, intelligence, willingness and overall strength of nerve and temperament. The goal is to produce a dog who will not just prove to be sufficient to obtain titles in herding or schutzhund, but who will excel in a variety of working endeavors. Health is a huge priority for working line breeders because it is necessary for their goals. No matter how excellent the dog is mentally, if he is unhealthy he is useless as a working dog."
> 
> Source: http://www.wildhauskennels.com/gsdtypes.htm


Again... Ok? Not sure how that has anything to do with what I said?

Really, you're just not getting my point. You're getting the point you THINK I'm making. So I don't really have anything else to say about it. *shrug*


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

sassafras said:


> Again... Ok? Not sure how that has anything to do with what I said?
> 
> Really, you're just not getting my point. You're getting the point you THINK I'm making. So I don't really have anything else to say about it. *shrug*


You are not getting it. They are not excluding anything based on colour. There are different lines of working lines, and are bred to different work/sport applications with different drives that are placed emphasis on.

They are not including white gsd's in breeding, because there are none that are able to do the work at high levels. Not because they are discriminating on colour. If they could they would. I have never seen a white GSD place in any high level sporting podium such as IPO. And you dont see them working on the field in police or military work. The same holds true for American Show lines. West German Show lines, are a bit more workable, but cant compete with working lines at the highest level of performance.

Some working line breeders are even now crossing, GSD's with Belgian Mals. The emphasis is the work and health. Not exclusion of colour.


----------



## gingerkid (Jul 11, 2012)

WesS said:


> You are not getting it. They are not excluding anything based on colour. There are different lines of working lines, and are bred to different work/sport applications with different drives that are placed emphasis on.
> 
> They are not including white gsd's in breeding, because there are none that are able to do the work at high levels. Not because they are discriminating on colour. If they could they would. I have never seen a white GSD place in any high level sporting podium such as IPO. And you dont see them working on the field in police or military work. The same holds true for American Show lines. West German Show lines, are a bit more workable, but cant compete with working lines at the highest level of performance.
> 
> Some working line breeders are even now crossing, GSD's with Belgian Mals. The emphasis is the work and health. Not exclusion of colour.


I think what you're not getting is that today *not all purebred dogs are bred to work*. In fact, I'd hazard a guess to say that the majority are not, but I have no data to back that up.

Either way, you seem to be totally oblivious to the fact that many breeders do not ignore the breed standards (as written by national and international kennel and breed clubs), and try to only breed acceptable colours as listed in the breed standard.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

So would they breed a white dog if one popped out?

Most breeds have some arbitrary color rules. It's not the end of the world. There are very very few breeds I can think of which can come in any color. Border Collies (not sure about show bred ones), maybe chihuahuas? I'm drawing a blank now.

Papillons are bicolor. Why? Dunno. Some point in history someone decided to stop allowing solid colored dogs so now the gene doesn't exist in the breed and all papillons are piebald.


----------



## gingerkid (Jul 11, 2012)

Laurelin said:


> So would they breed a white dog if one popped out?
> 
> Most breeds have some arbitrary color rules. It's not the end of the world. There are very very few breeds I can think of which can come in any color. Border Collies (not sure about show bred ones), maybe chihuahuas? I'm drawing a blank now..


I think poms have a pretty open colour standard.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

I think most of the sighthounds are pretty much "whatever" as far as color goes. 

I like the old saw, "no good dog is a bad color."


ETA: I mean, I understand completely things like not wanting extreme white or merle x merle breedings. Things that potentially affect the health of offspring. But in general, a lot of color standards are pretty much completely arbitrary.


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

Okay....let's get back to some real genetics. According to Malcom Willis (going from memory here....his book "Genetics of the Dog")...there are at least three or four genes which produce what humans view as "white." What some of us perceive as "white" is really a "cream" or "biscuit" color. This includes Great Pyrennes, Kuvaszok, the "white" Pulik, and yes, the white German Shepherd. With white German Shepherds, according to Max Von Stephanitz (founder of the breed), the female of the genesis of this great breed was white...and there are pictures of this bitch in his book...she is in fact, cream or biscuit-colored, which shouldn't be surprising since the above mentioned breeds in neighboring countries were no-doubt involved in some way. It is not known to be a gene that produces deafness or other related bad issues.

Then there is the white regarding Irish markings and similar markings. It is a different white gene than the "white" gene of the above dogs. By itself, it isn't any sort of "bad" gene, but so many breeds with traditional "irish markings" also covet the merle gene. Now things get dicey. Additionally....if nature is let alone, that gene sometimes gives a LOT of white, or minimal white, or somewhere in-between. 

Then there is that particular white gene...both by itself and in conjunction with other color genes which causes a lot of problems. Boxers, Dalmations, Bull Terriers....many others. Not only deafness, but kidney issues, etc. 

Here is part of the problem. "Dog show" humans think they "know" things they don't really know. They covet certain colors, or combination of colors which end up biting them in the butt later on. They CHEAT with chemicals to change colors and breed certain dogs for which we NOW deal with. I once had a job for a semi-retired famous handler duo at their boarding kennel. One of the breeds they were famous for were Kuvasz...and as I was cleaning out a storage room, I found all sorts of strange powders and bathing shampoos...I found out they were ALL bleach-based. They still had an aged Kuvasz that lived there at the boarding facility....a grand old boy....cream colored....but his pictures were all over the place in his glory years...he was GLEAMING WHITE. When I asked about these products, they told me, without any guile, bleaching dogs was the only way to win....because whiter was better. I don't even want to think about the agony so many dogs have gone through being bathed in a bleach solution strong enough to affect color. I've been blistered by bleach myself, so I know how caustic it is. 

But I've seen many "white" breeds with patches of cream...you see it in pyrennes, you see it in kuvasz, and in samoyeds...cream patches against white. It is very faint....but it is there, and I'm sure breeders get their panties in a wad over it....so obviously....within some breeds....a "good white" co-exists with a "bad white" and because 
white/white is more preferred, they will breed for winning, rather than what is genetically healthy. Let's take a good look at Boxers. Unfortunately, the white in that breed is not a good white. The "standard" says that at least 2/3rds of the dog must be either fawn or brindle, meaning, 1/3 of the dog can be white. Well, I've had good friends in the boxer world....I know that little world within a world....and in that "world" the word is "flash" meaning...there had BETTER be the most white possible if you want to win in the dog show ring. Look at any show magazine, or boxer publication...you will RARELEY see a self-colored boxer that is a big winner, or even a boxer with a snippet on it's face, and maybe some white on its toes....nope....the more white the better....all white front legs, big white on the chest, big white blaze on the face....push that envelope.....they are somehow more flashy than darker dogs. But when these breeders push for more "flash" (white), they cross the line and get a lot of all white boxers, and those dogs are at severe risk of being deaf. And yes, even today...these breeders (because the boxer world is highly competitive) cull these pups at birth. Furthermore...these same breeders will DENY they kill these puppies, in their quest for that "perfect 2/3's vs. 1/3 white to color ratio. As if boxers don't already have so many other health issues to contend with. Sigh. 

I'll close with the worst case of human hubris I personally witnessed...which is why if people want to know about white genes, they need to do real research and not simply believe Wiki, or personal accounts on some web site, but actually read from a true source, the genetics involved...I used to have a friend in my obedience club, who I also knew in the conformation world, who bred some really nice shelties. She was known for, and did most of her winning with her blue merle shelties. I knew her back then as a friend...thus, I knew her when she began getting "stuff" written about her in dog publications about her beautiful merle shelties. Well, she wasn't the first person I knew who let fame cloud her judgment in the dog show world, she is one countless others, but this one stuck with me because it was so blatent....she told me that she wanted to breed two of her merles that she gained her fame on...I wasn't a sheltie expert...but I was simply a curious person, so I read a LOT about a lot of breeds, a lot about dog breeding, and I knew breeding two merles was not a good move....especially with HER merles, who were that "ethereal" type of beauty because they were pale....again...a human's version of beauty. Well...I'm sure other people told her not to do the breeding like I did, but she did it anyway, and I got a phone call from her months later that well, her little "experiment" didn't work out so well....of course, initially, she was pleased when the puppies were born of her two famous merles...their color was "exquisite" but of course newborn pups don't hear or see until into the second and third week of life...and her puppies would never hear or see EVER. All of them were either blind, or deaf, or both. 

Hubris


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

To WesS: 

Look...GSD's from the time I was a child was my vision of the "ultimate dog." But then I went to my first dog show (US), and I was horrified. So of course I looked at imports and knew that is where I should go...but in the meantime, I acquired my first GSD through a friend at work...call him a *******, whatever....his GSD bitch was killing his goats, so I agreed to take her...he had a male GSD at the time as well....I got her.....didn't realize until about two weeks out she was pregnant. So I ended up with seven GSD pups...kept one...that is when I got involved in the whole dog world. Of course....she was backyard bred...no papers...but I got an ILP number on her...so I could show her in AKC performance events. I saw the father, of course I owned the mother. They LOOKED black and tan. This brings me to the set of pictures you submitted in this thread and you said from the first picture that the dog would be penalized for the "white on top." That WASN'T WHITE. That was simply a splash of silver over the withers which is indicative of many GSD's. So this tells me you have very little understanding of COLOR...because that first picture you posted had NOTHING to do with white. But GUESS what...of the seven pups I got from my bitch? ONE was a silver sable. Now...if YOU understand color genetics in the GSD as you so profoundly say you do, you would know that is impossible. Black and tan in the GSD is RECESSIVE. The sable color is dominant. In order to get a sable, one of the parents has to be sable. Two B&T's should only produce B&T. But yet, I got a sable pup. My bitch had a lot of that silver mottling throughout her coat, even though she had a definite "saddle pattern" indicative of a classic B&T GSD...but since she produced a sable pup...she HAD to be genetically sable. What we see phenotypically with some breeds is not always what they are genotypically.

But that aside you also want us to believe that people who breed working GSD's care about health. You say:

"Plain and simple, working lines are bred for their working ability. Dogs are judged for breed worthiness, and breeding partners are selected based on their ability to not only work well, but also to produce strong, balanced working dogs. Rather than looking at angulation or movement or color, working line breeders focus on traits like drive, courage, hardness, intelligence, willingness and overall strength of nerve and temperament. The goal is to produce a dog who will not just prove to be sufficient to obtain titles in herding or schutzhund, but who will excel in a variety of working endeavors. Health is a huge priority for working line breeders because it is necessary for their goals. No matter how excellent the dog is mentally, if he is unhealthy he is useless as a working dog."

You are quoting that from a personal website...obviously a breeder that you have taken a liking to. But REAL LIFE blows that out of the water. Much to my personal pain....what I see now are Belgian Malinois taking over the roles that USED to be exclusive to the GSD. It is a MYTH that breeders who focus on "performance" somehow by osmosis escape the health issues...they don't....far too many are just as keen to use a dog that doesn't pass screenings because they have proven successful in performance, just like those breeders in conformation lie about the screenings of their dogs. I personally don't think the Belgian Malinois is on par with the tasks that need to be performed from which the GSD used to do....but I UNDERSTAND why that breed is being favored now...because PEOPLE screwed up a totally wonderful breed. They'll end up screwing up the malinois as well....just give it time. 

Schutzhund USED to be a trademark skill for a good dog to pass...but it is not that anymore. It has simply become a SPORT where inept people decide certain rules of exactly HOW a dog should obtain certain goals. I was involved in schutzhund for a time with my GSD...thus, I was able to talk with many people involved with that sport. I remember coveting a certain dog....He was so wonderful....non-reactive...calm....he had a SCH I title....I asked his owner why she didn't pursue a II with this this wonderful dog...and she told me...he is too smart...he knows the game...he didn't act like an idiot enough to gain the points for a II and certainly not a III. In other words, he was TOO STABLE to get to the nexus of that SPORT. In other words...he was incorruptible....and THAT is actually what a GSD should be...but yet he was pushed aside for his owners more maniacal young dogs to get those bigger TITLES. 

WesS....You THINK you know about GSD's...I've already created a lot of space...if you are interested....I've done a lot of tracking work with my "*******" bred GSD, and she was so good, I worked with four different police agencies to help train their own dogs. So I KNOW that police agencies (at least the good ones) DON'T buy schutzhund trained dogs because those dogs are too artificial....and I know a lot of dogs these agencies buy from so-called "performance breeders" have died young due to SCREENABLE health issues they don't bother doing because they THINK they are better than conformation people. Look...I love the GSD breed....but I've ended up with other breeds, whippets included...SIMPLY to JUST FIND honorable people. I'm still looking. So back to the whole color thing, this has NOTHING to do with white GSD's.


----------



## gingerkid (Jul 11, 2012)

PaddiB said:


> WesS....You THINK you know about GSD's...I've already created a lot of space...if you are interested....I've done a lot of tracking work with my "*******" bred GSD, and she was so good, I worked with four different police agencies to help train their own dogs. So I KNOW that police agencies (at least the good ones) DON'T buy schutzhund trained dogs because those dogs are too artificial....and I know a lot of dogs these agencies buy from so-called "performance breeders" have died young due to SCREENABLE health issues they don't bother doing because they THINK they are better than conformation people. Look...I love the GSD breed....but I've ended up with other breeds, whippets included...SIMPLY to JUST FIND honorable people. I'm still looking. So back to the whole color thing, this has NOTHING to do with white GSD's.


Yeah, I don't know what police agencies he's thinking of that buy schutzhund trained dogs, because the K9 police agencies that I am familiar with only take in purpose-bred puppies from their own breeding program or from selected breeders with whom they have a working relationship specifically for the purpose of producing police patrol dogs; the puppies are assessed and trained essentially from birth for police work including tracking and take-down of suspects.

Our local agency sometimes also takes in detection dogs, which may come from a variety of sources in addition to the purpose-bred dogs. The detection dogs that come from outside of the breeding programs are only used for detection (e.g. of narcotics or explosives), and are not used for bite work or tracking. That is to say, patrol dogs may also be trained in detection, but as far as I am aware non-patrol detection dogs are not used for patrol.

Edit: But maybe it's different in the USA than it is in Canada, I do not know.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

PaddiB said:


> To WesS:
> 
> Look...GSD's from the time I was a child was my vision of the "ultimate dog." But then I went to my first dog show (US), and I was horrified. So of course I looked at imports and knew that is where I should go...but in the meantime, I acquired my first GSD through a friend at work...call him a *******, whatever....his GSD bitch was killing his goats, so I agreed to take her...he had a male GSD at the time as well....I got her.....didn't realize until about two weeks out she was pregnant. So I ended up with seven GSD pups...kept one...that is when I got involved in the whole dog world. Of course....she was backyard bred...no papers...but I got an ILP number on her...so I could show her in AKC performance events. I saw the father, of course I owned the mother. They LOOKED black and tan. This brings me to the set of pictures you submitted in this thread and you said from the first picture that the dog would be penalized for the "white on top." That WASN'T WHITE. That was simply a splash of silver over the withers which is indicative of many GSD's. So this tells me you have very little understanding of COLOR...because that first picture you posted had NOTHING to do with white. But GUESS what...of the seven pups I got from my bitch? ONE was a silver sable. Now...if YOU understand color genetics in the GSD as you so profoundly say you do, you would know that is impossible. Black and tan in the GSD is RECESSIVE. The sable color is dominant. In order to get a sable, one of the parents has to be sable. Two B&T's should only produce B&T. But yet, I got a sable pup. My bitch had a lot of that silver mottling throughout her coat, even though she had a definite "saddle pattern" indicative of a classic B&T GSD...but since she produced a sable pup...she HAD to be genetically sable. What we see phenotypically with some breeds is not always what they are genotypically.
> 
> ...


Wont comment on first part. Dont like subjective stories about strange personal happenings out of the norm. Also dont care for colour eugenics in conformation lines. It is common knowledge that pure white dogs are not favoured in the GSD. Much of my reasoning, I assure you is sound.

Valid points on the IPO. Again different working lines. Bred for different work. Some believe in standards, most breed for the required drives. Its about breeder reputation, and breeding for various drives for specialised work. This is a huge debate on the germanshepherd and working forums. Go there and discuss it as much as you like. This is getting way off topic, and is turning into a completely different debate. You can argue for mondioring, or hard KNPV dogs, or you can argue for actual police work. The point is they are bred for performance instead of angulation or colour. Most people here can grasp what IPO/schutzhund is. Its a matter of relating. 

I certainly have some knowledge and a personal opinion to share on this with owners with no GSD experience on lines. The question was essentially about white, GSD, and rolling with the comments we got to this. You want to talk about the intricacies? I invite you to come to the GSD forums and post exactly that. There will be a better discussion there. Not trying to disprove anything of what you are saying. In fact your posts are valuable. And you actually add to knowledge instead of detracting.

Im not an expert. Your criticism here is going overboard. My point is that breeding for colour alone is not a good idea.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

A lot of the local police departments do get young adult dogs (takes too long for pups to grow up), a lot of them imported from Holland or Slovakia (?). Some are already trained, but I doubt they were trained in Schutzhund. Those that aren't already trained go to police dog school with their handlers. 

Here's one town that outlines their process pretty well: http://cityofyankton.org/publicsafety/police/k9.php


----------



## Kayota (Aug 14, 2009)

white gsds are no different structurally, behaviorally than the lines they descend from... they are not favored for the reason all protection breeds do not favor light dogs... less intimidating.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

Willowy said:


> A lot of the local police departments do get young adult dogs (takes too long for pups to grow up), a lot of them imported from Holland or Slovakia (?). Some are already trained, but I doubt they were trained in Schutzhund. Those that aren't already trained go to police dog school with their handlers.
> 
> Here's one town that outlines their process pretty well: http://cityofyankton.org/publicsafety/police/k9.php


I actually did not say that police dogs were gathered from IPO/schh. IPO is a sport/temperment application/std.. A well bred dog should be able to however do both. Specialise with training, not with breeding. However often breeders will breed specifically for either sport or work and so on.

The world is a messed up place. Pretty much anything said about any breed/dog can be broken down. I am just becoming increasingly disillusioned with all this, (select a dog because I like the way it looks. And standardisation of the look. The angle of the hind quarter and so forth. When wild tetrapods of any animal form have completely different movement dynamics.

Some people involved in conformation can not even recognise the stride cycle of a GSD at full flight.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

WesS said:


> My point is that breeding for colour alone is not a good idea.


And my point is that excluding certain colors IS breeding for color. Therefore a bad idea.


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

WesS said:


> Much of my reasoning, I assure you is sound.


Well, I suppose if you assure me, I'll believe you. Lol. >.>


----------



## gingerkid (Jul 11, 2012)

I'm a bit confused WesS... It seems like you're suggesting that dogs (maybe just GSDs?) shouldn't be bred for just one specific purpose, but in the other thread you were arguing that trainers shouldn't get flak for wanting only to work with breeds bred to excel at a specific task?

Could you clarify?


----------



## titiaamor (Nov 17, 2011)

In Sacramento CA they have used several rescues from the city pound as,police dogs. 



gingerkid said:


> Yeah, I don't know what police agencies he's thinking of that buy schutzhund trained dogs, because the K9 police agencies that I am familiar with only take in purpose-bred puppies from their own breeding program or from selected breeders with whom they have a working relationship specifically for the purpose of producing police patrol dogs; the puppies are assessed and trained essentially from birth for police work including tracking and take-down of suspects.
> 
> Our local agency sometimes also takes in detection dogs, which may come from a variety of sources in addition to the purpose-bred dogs. The detection dogs that come from outside of the breeding programs are only used for detection (e.g. of narcotics or explosives), and are not used for bite work or tracking. That is to say, patrol dogs may also be trained in detection, but as far as I am aware non-patrol detection dogs are not used for patrol.
> 
> Edit: But maybe it's different in the USA than it is in Canada, I do not know.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

sassafras said:


> WesS said:
> 
> 
> > My point is that breeding for colour alone is not a good idea.
> ...


As usual your not seeing the full picture. Getting out of the working line debate. Which really is not bred for colour at all. And returning to show lines.
This comment is sensitive with regards to GSD only and showline breed standards (not other breeds). They key word here is ALONE. Or when colour is the absolute overlying indicator. 

Taking a rare white dog. (And make no mistake as the gsd developed, wheather by diversity or purposeful action) white gsds became quite rare in normal litters. And forcing those dogs to breed is terrible. Because your hunting just for RARE colors, with much fewer dogs to chose from. The starting dogs of a line are important. The initial gsd dogs were vehemently sought after by max for ability to work. Here they were sought after for having a rare white gene.

Now when you have standardized type. And you exclude some dogs based on certain 'out of the ordinary colourings' who are essentially outliers(out of the normal) or characteristics that is simply not as bad. You still have a bigger population that passes the criteria. You are still using the majority mean sample. (Think bell curve. )Think that you can still select from the main sample of dogs based on more than just colour. (whatever that may be, as flawed as people think those criteria are). So basically you are not fundamentally changing much of anything on colour. Whereas when you breed the rare trait specifically and purposefully, everything changes about the breed of dog. You are left with random traits, that is a white dog.

Now your template may not be optimal in either case. But you are turning 100 shades of grey into black and and white. And it's not like that.

Simply put. It would turn the breed standard upside down if they allowed white. Because some breeders would breed only for white. If they did that the gsd would completely fundamentally change. So it is disqualified. If people bred only white, and they were of 'breed standard' and then were re-introduced into the sables (who would be of same breed standard), as some may do and still be able to call it a GSD, you are now completely randomising all other considerations, in favour for the random charcteristics that were associated with colour. 

This is a HUMAN FLAW. When you create these breed standards, you either stick with majority samples, or don't breed for colour at all. Conformation is a mess anyways. So should they have never banned white dogs to begin with, and never achieved the sable look? Maybe. But they did. And it is what it is. And so long as they follow those conformation rules, and consumers pick dogs based on colour, and there are breeders who WILL breed and SELL as only white. Well you don't want those dogs as part of those lines. It is all marketing anyways to get people to 'identify' dogs as pure-breds and attach value to them.


----------



## BigLittle (May 28, 2014)

titiaamor said:


> In Sacramento CA they have used several rescues from the city pound as,police dogs.


Wow, I didn't even know that and I live not too far from there.

I do know my local PD used to import GSDs but switched to BelMals because they couldn't find enough dogs fit for work that would have a decent working lifespan.


----------



## Gumiho (Mar 16, 2013)

sassafras said:


> And my point is that excluding certain colors IS breeding for color.* Therefore a bad idea*.


Not even close...

Yes, certain methods of breeding for color is bad.

Excluding certain colors are not for two reasons:

1. Certain colors will never naturally pop up in a breed. So the sudden occurrence should not just be accepted and bred willy nilly. Merle in APBT being a good example. Breeders don't know what is behind those dogs.

2. In the event that it is a mutation that pops up randomly, like Albino in Dobermans, the color should not be accepted and bred willy nilly because breeders don't know what issues may be accompanying that genetic mutation. And in the case of Albino dobes, there ARE health issues that accompany it.

In many breeds no active selection is needed in regards to color simply because the other colors don't even occur. The standard is merely a prevention stating that other colors should not randomly appear and that should they do so, don't go rushing to breed them. (There are idiotic situations where a breed's standard has, whether by mistake or someone with influence pushing their preference, excluded historic colors that have no health issues or questionable origin tied to them... And that is bad... )

There are some unscrupulous breeders who do breed actively for color, even in the show world, and breed regardless of risks... That is bad.

But someone that avoids breeding Z factored dobermans... That is GOOD. Avoiding breeding Merle to merle, is GOOD. Avoiding breeding for extreme white is GOOD. And that counts as breeding for color also.

Its not a one size fits all issue. You have to look at the big picture. Breeding for novel colors first and foremost, and placing health, structure and temperament as negotiable, is bad. Breeding for winning colors and placing health, structure and temperament as negotiable, is bad. Setting a good specimen aside for poor markings is short sighted and not in the best interest of the breed.

But simply opting to not breed dogs of colors that shouldn't even exist in a breed is not.
Opting to not breed colors known for health issues is not.


----------



## sandgrubber (May 21, 2014)

sassafras said:


> I have no idea how Squash isn't deaf. He's got a very small amount of tan speckling on his ears and that's about it.


Perhaps he is deaf, but telepathic


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

WesS said:


> As usual your not seeing the full picture.


Oh, I am seeing the big picture. Not sure why you are fixated only on GSDs but let's try a different breed. How many sound, genetically valuable yellow flatmates have been eliminated over the years? Why? Because of a fear of not appearing distinct enough from goldens? FCR breeders are, in effect, breeding for color - liver and black, but not golden.

As usual you seem to think I'm arguing a point I'm not. You seem to be under the mistaken impression that when I say "breeding for color" I mean "breeding exclusively for color." That's not the case at all. But if any mention of color is in a breed standard, then on some level color is a consideration.



sandgrubber said:


> Perhaps he is deaf, but telepathic


Oh. Crap. We're doomed.


----------



## sandgrubber (May 21, 2014)

Anyone know about "white" Labradors? I've heard rumors that there are white Labs with black noses/nails etc. that are not just light cream, but true white. I like variety of colors . . . and if there is a true white Labrador strain, without health defects, I could see looking for a pup. 

p.s. IMO 'rare colors' can become a fad, not justifying attention. But I would love to even see one of the rare colors Mary Roslyn Williams describes, eg., 'hailstone' Labs or Labs with a dual color: black for the outer coat, white for the undercoat. I can't see any harm in preserving such oddities, and it makes me sad to hear they were culled out.


----------



## gingerkid (Jul 11, 2012)

titiaamor said:


> In Sacramento CA they have used several rescues from the city pound as,police dogs.


That's really cool!


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

All the 'white' labs and goldens I've seen have been light cream. Labs don't carry any of the true white spotting genes.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

sassafras said:


> And my point is that excluding certain colors IS breeding for color. Therefore a bad idea.





WesS said:


> As usual your not seeing the full picture. Getting out of the working line debate. Which really is not bred for colour at all. And returning to show lines.
> This comment is sensitive with regards to GSD only and showline breed standards (not other breeds). They key word here is ALONE. Or when colour is the absolute overlying indicator.
> 
> Taking a rare white dog. (And make no mistake as the gsd developed, wheather by diversity or purposeful action) white gsds became quite rare in normal litters. And forcing those dogs to breed is terrible. Because your hunting just for RARE colors, with much fewer dogs to chose from. The starting dogs of a line are important. The initial gsd dogs were vehemently sought after by max for ability to work. Here they were sought after for having a rare white gene.
> ...





sassafras said:


> Oh, I am seeing the big picture. Not sure why you are fixated only on GSDs but let's try a different breed. How many sound, genetically valuable yellow flatmates have been eliminated over the years? Why? Because of a fear of not appearing distinct enough from goldens? FCR breeders are, in effect, breeding for color - liver and black, but not golden.
> 
> As usual you seem to think I'm arguing a point I'm not. You seem to be under the mistaken impression that when I say "breeding for color" I mean "breeding exclusively for color." That's not the case at all. But if any mention of color is in a breed standard, then on some level color is a consideration.


Ok lets. I agree with the following post by Gumiho. Which is specifically adressed to the first quote you made:That all I have to say.


sassafras said:


> And my point is that excluding certain colors IS breeding for color. Therefore a bad idea.





Gumiho said:


> Not even close...
> 
> Yes, certain methods of breeding for color is bad.
> 
> ...


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

God I hope so, but somehow I doubt it.


----------



## sandgrubber (May 21, 2014)

Laurelin said:


> All the 'white' labs and goldens I've seen have been light cream. Labs don't carry any of the true white spotting genes.


The Wing 'n Wave site (Pam Davol) speculates that white may be genetically distinct and more like the Westie than the normal yellow Lab. That was written a decade ago . . . I was wondering if anything more definitive had been written since.

http://labbies.com/genetics2.htm#White
The "White" Form of Yellow

Although the "white" color is considered by most Lab breeders to be a very light shade of yellow, this color may be quite distinct from the yellow shade that may represent cream-colored yellows represented as genotype [As_B_ cch_ee] above. In fact, the "white" color may be represented by another allele that may be found at the C locus. The "cd" allele is responsible for producing white hair in other breeds of dogs, like the West Highland White Terrier, while allowing full expression of dark nose and eye pigment. Though this white color may be distinct from the yellow coloration, it should still be grouped with the other yellow variations since its expression is also controlled by both the E and C loci.


----------



## hanksimon (Mar 18, 2009)

In general, I assume the discussion refers to most breeds, and that color pattern is determined by appearance and by norm for the breed [ e.g. white dobbie]. However, color and pattern can be genetic and epigenetic [in the womb]. Are there any genetic blood tests that can determine characteristics such as merle, double merle, etc. which could be used for definitive screening, as needed?

On the other hand....
I don't know if there is a special white Lab, but I was 'assured' by Lab breeders that a normal litter of 10 [!!!] Lab puppies might include black, chocolate, and yellow in some distribution that can include lots of white on one end of the spectrum or Fox Red on the other end. In a white litter, a black sheep [black goat or vampire, since it's a Lab puppy] can slip in. [I think a Lab x Weim is used to get a silver lab] I assure you that this is probably true.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Its not the breed, its the type of white. some breeds, like collies, aussies etc have a recessive gene for the "pattern white" gene (which I believe is the same gene that causes paint pigment in horses), I know its called something, but I cant remember what it's offical name is LOL. 

Dogs like dobies have a gene that is essentially partial albino, which is a true lack of pigment. A lot of white on most working dogs is frowned upon because they are more visible at night and in their original roles as night patrol dogs, it would put them at a disadvantage. 

With aussies / MAS I believe the white markings (as in the collar, if they have one) cant go past the point of the withers, or extend past the ears. Also, white markings on the head are undesirable. Basically, the fewer white markings a MAS has, the better.

Again, if I have gotten something wrong, please correct me.


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

Sigh. Wes...I'm pretty sure I've probably studied GSD's longer than you have been alive. The reason I say this, is that I can pretty much chart where you are now in your vision of GSD's and what you are saying now, with what I was saying and believing almost 30 years ago. For those familiar with "Columbo" that detective on T.V. that most people thought was "unaware" because he focused on "little" things...yet he was always right in the end....I still go back several pages, where you posted those pictures, and you "pronounced" that splash of grizzle was "white" on the first dog listed. You were wrong in that regard, and the subsequent pictures you posted were of richly colored dogs, no doubt of foreign decent, and no doubt of strictly working lines...and you are currently in a mind-set that this is somehow the epitome of the breed. YOU chose to join this conversation regarding color....so keep that in mind.

I certainly won't change your mind, because like I said, I have been in the "head space" you are now....thinking quality of the GSD was in a certain richness of color. I hate to do this, because it creates a long post, but this is how you responded to the last thing I posted, and I believe you were actually rattled by what I wrote based on this response:

"Wont comment on first part. Dont like subjective stories about strange personal happenings out of the norm. Also dont care for colour eugenics in conformation lines. It is common knowledge that pure white dogs are not favoured in the GSD. Much of my reasoning, I assure you is sound.

Valid points on the IPO. Again different working lines. Bred for different work. Some believe in standards, most breed for the required drives. Its about breeder reputation, and breeding for various drives for specialised work. This is a huge debate on the germanshepherd and working forums. Go there and discuss it as much as you like. This is getting way off topic, and is turning into a completely different debate. You can argue for mondioring, or hard KNPV dogs, or you can argue for actual police work. The point is they are bred for performance instead of angulation or colour. Most people here can grasp what IPO/schutzhund is. Its a matter of relating. 

I certainly have some knowledge and a personal opinion to share on this with owners with no GSD experience on lines. The question was essentially about white, GSD, and rolling with the comments we got to this. You want to talk about the intricacies? I invite you to come to the GSD forums and post exactly that. There will be a better discussion there. Not trying to disprove anything of what you are saying. In fact your posts are valuable. And you actually add to knowledge instead of detracting.

Im not an expert. Your criticism here is going overboard. My point is that breeding for colour alone is not a good idea. "

You say: "It is common knowledge that pure white dogs are not favoured in the GSD. Much of my reasoning, I assure you is sound." So obviously you missed a historical points...that the female genesis of this breed WAS what you seem to think of as white, but I have said wasn't really white, but cream or biscuit....thus, you can't SAY it is common knowledge, because I know many purists who recognize that point.

I love the fact that others have "called you to the carpet because you pronounce "Much of my reasoning, I assure you is sound" when you have chosen to pick and choose certain facts, and the fact you have given NO reason for any of us to believe you know what you are talking about through personal experience, only regurgitate what was written on a website of someone you seem to fancy. I find it ODD that you are so defensive that you say my comments go "overboard." when my comments are in FACT from personal experience. 

Look...It doesn't even matter what I say...you only have to OPEN YOUR EYES to see the VERY SAD state of the GSD as a breed. And don't forget...THIS was my first love, what I thought as the APEX of dogs...but now....labs and goldens are taking over as assistance dogs, malinois are taking over as protection/police/military dogs....ALL of that used to be the reign of the GSD...you want to talk about performance? Schutzhund is merely a SPORT...I've entered that world...I know what it is all about....it covets unstable dogs in the protection arena....the participants CHEAT in the tracking arena....oh yes...I KNOW...I've obtained tracking titles years ago on my GSD's....LEGITIMATELY....but when I got involved in schutzhund...I found out it was plagued with cheaters....buying track layers to soak their boots in liver juice the night before...starving dogs three days before an event,.etc etc....that sport doesn't CARE about the character of the dog...they only care if OWNERS are astute enough to play the game to make their dog succeed.

I don't need to log onto the GSD groups you provided. Because I've already been there. And guess what...they aren't about truth. Here is a very DISTURBING truth about GSD's...when I finally left the breed, I acquired another breed that I thought was healthier....just so happened after 11 years of owning my new breed, that she had a disease VERY familiar in the GSD. Degenerative Myelopathy (DM). So because it was so new in my new breed, but I knew it was rampant in GSD's...I joined several groups in the GSD world....And did I find solace? ABSOLUTELY NOT. I was met with the same kind of deniability that YOU exhibit in your supposed knowledge. I was privately emailed by so many people who were AFRAID of talking about it publicly about "lines" that carried this horrible gene....Guess what....working lines are just as culpable as show lines...NOBODY wants to tell the truth...GSD people have DESTROYED themselves. You THINK you know the answer? Come back in 20 years IF you are an actual ethical person that sees the horror.


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

<<Dogs like dobies have a gene that is essentially partial albino, which is a true lack of pigment. A lot of white on most working dogs is frowned upon because they are more visible at night and in their original roles as night patrol dogs, it would put them at a disadvantage. With aussies / MAS I believe the white markings (as in the collar, if they have one) cant go past the point of the withers, or extend past the ears. Also, white markings on the head are undesirable. Basically, the fewer white markings a MAS has, the better. Again, if I have gotten something wrong, please correct me. >>

Look, again....it is all in the genes, and I personally don't take much stock in PEOPLE saying why white is either good or bad for their function. The subject of Dobermans keeps coming up....so perhaps this is a perfect time to talk about dilutes. I have NEVER talked with anybody involved with Dobermans that hasn't admitted there is an issue with TWO of the FOUR colors allowed. The two main colors....black and rust, and red and rust. The other two colors ARE dilutes....blue and rust, and fawn and rust. The last two are DILUTES. That gene is connected to important health genes. The Doberman breeders who I actually RESPECT have no use for the dilute genes.

OwnedbyACD's...I GET IT, that your view, because of what you have HEARD is why certain color restrictions have occurred...but REALLY??? When one THINKS ABOUT IT...WHY???? You say: <<With aussies / MAS I believe the white markings (as in the collar, if they have one) cant go past the point of the withers, or extend past the ears. Also, white markings on the head are undesirable. Basically, the fewer white markings a MAS has, the better>>

So....if an ACD or an MAS is bred with white that passes the plane of the withers, or has a a blaze down the muzzle, yet functions PERFECTLY well in his capacity as a working dog...when perhaps "perfectly colored" dogs wouldn't know a sheep or cow from a hole in the wall...what color is better???? Remember Lassie? The original Lassie? Who was in reality a MALE dog, not a female...and he had a big white blaze up his face? OMG...it was a HUGE issue in the Collie world...who had ARBITRARILY denounced white blazes on the face.....it is now allowed BECAUSE of Lassie. So...why was it such a horrible thing BEFORE Lassie....obviously not such a horrible thing when the buying public WANTED that white blaze that the Collie club CHANGED the standard to ALLOW it. WHY WOULD SHEEP CARE IF A COLLIE HAD A WHITE BLAZE ON IT'S FACE?????

I know of another breed...the Rhodesian Ridgeback... who in its beginning sported brindle, sable and wheaten colors.....WITH whatever WHITE they happened to possess. Well guess what...ONE certain person led a campaign to STANDARDIZE this breed....and he happened to own ONLY wheaten dogs with very little white...obviously he was a powerful type person in the breed at that time...thus...everybody BOWED to his whim, thus, EVERY other color other than wheaten, ANY dog with significant white markings, were excluded from a HUGELY CRITICAL time in that breed's development. It didn't MATTER that is made NO DIFFERENCE regarding color and worthiness in the field...it only MATTERED that a cocky HUMAN enjoyed the power which has led, unfortunately, to a genetic bottleneck in that breed...because just like people in the ACD world, or MAS world, or any other breed world which FORCED a color/marking standard, they didn't do it because it was necessary for the breed, they did it or human glory because THEY wanted to be attributed, or STAMPED as the founder of a breed.

Oh, this is good...the Scottish Deerhound standard "Color is a matter of fancy, but the dark blue-gray is most preferred. Next come the darker and lighter grays or brindles, the darkest being generally preferred. Yellow and sandy red or red fawn, especially with black ears and muzzles, are equally high in estimation. This was the color of the oldest known strains-the McNeil and Chesthill Menzies. White is condemned by all authorities, but a white chest and white toes, occurring as they do in many of the darkest-colored dogs, are not objected to, although the less the better, for the Deerhound is a self-colored dog. A white blaze on the head, or a white collar, should entirely disqualify. The less white the better but a slight white tip to the stern occurs in some of the best strains."

Might I remind people of the first sentence, "color is a matter of fancy." Oh, the hubris of humans. Hey....anybody know why the Scottish Deerhound at the last Westminster show looked like it was ready to DIE? I'm sure it had nothing to do with it's color.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

PaddiB said:


> <<Dogs like dobies have a gene that is essentially partial albino, which is a true lack of pigment. A lot of white on most working dogs is frowned upon because they are more visible at night and in their original roles as night patrol dogs, it would put them at a disadvantage. With aussies / MAS I believe the white markings (as in the collar, if they have one) cant go past the point of the withers, or extend past the ears. Also, white markings on the head are undesirable. Basically, the fewer white markings a MAS has, the better. Again, if I have gotten something wrong, please correct me. >>
> 
> Look, again....it is all in the genes, and I personally don't take much stock in PEOPLE saying why white is either good or bad for their function. The subject of Dobermans keeps coming up....so perhaps this is a perfect time to talk about dilutes. I have NEVER talked with anybody involved with Dobermans that hasn't admitted there is an issue with TWO of the FOUR colors allowed. The two main colors....black and rust, and red and rust. The other two colors ARE dilutes....blue and rust, and fawn and rust. The last two are DILUTES. That gene is connected to important health genes. The Doberman breeders who I actually RESPECT have no use for the dilute genes.
> 
> ...


Yes, on the face in aussies and in MAS, the blaze can't be past the eyes I believe. It is like that because in my breed, if the white doesn't cover the ears, if can lead to deafness. Also I have heard that too much white in a herding dog can spook the animals they are herding.

JohnnyBandit can correct me if I am wrong ( since he has forgotten more about ACDs than I will ever know) to much white causes health problems., deafness and blindness among others.


----------



## Spicy1_VV (Jun 1, 2007)

I've not heard of white causing blindness, deafness yes. It has to do with lack of pigment in the inner ear. I'm not sure exactlywhy it is an issue in some breeds (seems like a common problem in white Boxers) and not others (rare issue in Pit Bulls).




sassafras said:


> I'd just like to expand on this a little bit. If a dog has to be eliminated from a breeding program because it had a mask that was slightly too large/too small for the standard, for example, then that breeder is breeding for color. There are some breeds (mostly hounds I think) that basically allow any color; those are the only breed STANDARDS who can claim they don't breed for color (although individual breeders may prefer specific colors).
> 
> It's a shame that dogs who are otherwise sound temperamentally, structurally, healthwise get eliminated from gene pools because a patch of white on the chest or toes was too big. Or because the border between white and dark areas were too smudgy. And don't even get me started on Danes allowing harlequin but not merle (or any of the other unacceptable colors that can come from acceptable colors).
> 
> But breeding for color is bad, mmmkay?


Not just hounds the only color exclusion in the APBT is Merle. I think that's a good thing considering the associated health problems and origins.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

PaddiB said:


> OwnedbyACD's...I GET IT, that your view, because of what you have HEARD is why certain color restrictions have occurred...but REALLY??? When one THINKS ABOUT IT...WHY???? You say: <<With aussies / MAS I believe the white markings (as in the collar, if they have one) cant go past the point of the withers, or extend past the ears. Also, white markings on the head are undesirable. Basically, the fewer white markings a MAS has, the better>>
> 
> So....if an ACD or an MAS is bred with white that passes the plane of the withers, or has a a blaze down the muzzle, yet functions PERFECTLY well in his capacity as a working dog...when perhaps "perfectly colored" dogs wouldn't know a sheep or cow from a hole in the wall...what color is better???? Remember Lassie? The original Lassie? Who was in reality a MALE dog, not a female...and he had a big white blaze up his face? OMG...it was a HUGE issue in the Collie world...who had ARBITRARILY denounced white blazes on the face.....it is now allowed BECAUSE of Lassie. So...why was it such a horrible thing BEFORE Lassie....obviously not such a horrible thing when the buying public WANTED that white blaze that the Collie club CHANGED the standard to ALLOW it. WHY WOULD SHEEP CARE IF A COLLIE HAD A WHITE BLAZE ON IT'S FACE?????



I am going to comment ONLY on ACDs and cattle herding dogs..... Because I currently own ACDs and am heavily invested in the breed..... And because I have been working cows about 40 years.....

White in ACDs is BAD.... White in ANY herding dog is BAD...... A dog that is predominantly white.... "ghosts" at night.... And anyone that says but no one works cattle at night... Needs to come to Florida, Texas, Australia, etc. In the summer. I can only speak for Florida but I know it happens in other places.... In the summer, June, July, August, and September.... IF we have any sort of moon and need to do something with our stock... We work cows at night.... Heck in July and August it is likely to be in the 80's at 2 am. 

As I said.... A white dog "ghosts" it lights the heck up in the moonlight.... Almost glows.... Folks can argue all they choose.... It happens, I have seen it, and it freaks cattle out.... A light red dog will not do it... A light blue dog will not do it.... You also will not see any white horses working stock in hot climates for the same reason.

I would rather play Russian Roulette with Christopher Walken (see the Deer Hunter) than be between a white dog and a bunch of Brahma cross cattle... 

No herding dog that are primarily white.... EVER.... Even if you do not work stock at night.... You never know when you might have to do so. 

A dog that is largely white on stock at night..... You are asking for you, your dog and your stock to get hurt...


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> JohnnyBandit can correct me if I am wrong ( since he has forgotten more about ACDs than I will ever know) to much white causes health problems., deafness and blindness among others.


White ACDs have a high chance of deafness.... But more importantly... (Not that a deaf dog is not important.... No one with a heart wants to produce a deaf dog.... ) but a white dog will spook your cattle, get you.... the dog and your cattle hurt......

My grandfather bred catahoulas and we used them on stock.... And you can take a line of catahoulas and get a dog with a high percentage of white.. Easily..... It take effort to keep the dogs darker.... We never went that way.... Because in the summer we would have to move cows around at night. Someone can say.... .Breeding for color is bad... But Granddaddy made an effort to keep his dogs marked up with color.... It kept everyone safer. 

Now Catahoula breeders that primarily ran raccoons loved dogs with a lot of white... Because they could see their dogs at night.

And this is what folks do not understand about color in breed standards... in working and herding breeds.... Colors became faults for a reason..... In ACDs.... It is not like someone woke up one day and said I hate white dogs... Or black dogs (black dog suck up the heat in a hot climate... A DARK ACD will have to stop because of heat before the work is done in a hot climate) They faulted colors for a reason.....


----------



## BigLittle (May 28, 2014)

Fascinating...in central California, summer temps probably are similar to the deep south (but with 0% humidity...)

I've never seen a white or black quarter horse living on the nearby farms. Always some form of red with the odd (red) piebald/appaloosa here and there.


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

I'm very glad JohnnyBandit chimed in on this. I've offered some research later on in this post...because ACD's are sort of unique. JohnnyBandit also acknowledges that his expertise lies in with the ACD, and not other breeds. I have no doubt his personal experiences are what they are, there is no reason for me to disagree. For the cattle he works, white is an issue...but ACD's don't typically carry any significant white...it is a matter of light or dark, so in his experience, for the cattle he has worked, darker works better. 

<<From BMC Veterinary research: "Univariable and multivariable analyses revealed a negative association between deafness and bilateral facial masks (odds ratio 0.2; P ≤ 0.001). Using multivariable logistic animal modelling, the risk of deafness was lower in dogs with pigmented body spots (odds ratio 0.4; P = 0.050). 

No significant associations were found between deafness and coat colour. Within unilaterally deaf dogs with unilateral facial masks, no association was observed between the side of deafness and side of mask. The side of unilateral deafness was not significantly clustered amongst unilaterally deaf dogs from the same litter. Females were at increased risk of deafness (odds ratio from a logistic animal model 1.9; P = 0.034) after adjusting for any confounding by mask type and pigmented body spots. Australian Cattle Dogs suffer from CHSD, and this disease is more common in dogs with mask-free faces, and in those without pigmented body patches. In unilaterally deaf dogs with unilateral masks, the lack of observed association between side of deafness and side of mask suggests that if CHSD is due to defects in molecular pigment pathways, the molecular control of embryonic melanoblast migration from ectoderm to skin differs from control of migration from ectoderm to cochlea. In Australian Cattle Dogs, CHSD may be more common in females. >>

So in case people missed it...."Within unilaterally deaf dogs with unilateral facial masks, no association was observed between the side of deafness and side of mask." This means...deafness doesn't ALWAYS mean lack of pigmentation....just like there are different genes of white, there are different genes for deafness. Yes, humans are smart, and humans have the means to figure out a lot of things, but humans also like to "be the first" to "announce" some scientific certainty, where no certainty exits. Humans DON'T know everything about color and ears mean...and I say this because I began to raise chickens....and the "train of thought" by humans was....if the ears of chickens was white, they would produce white eggs...if the ears were colored, they would produce brown eggs. Well, that is certainly not true. 

So let's discuss white as it pertains to how sheep, goats or cattle perceive it.....why are so many "flock guardians" all white? (which I contend isn't really white, but off-white....as was the female genesis of the GSD). Obviously, herbivore flocks were not afraid of white dogs being in their midst....and in fact, the fact they WERE white, as opposed to the wild element, allowed them to accept their white protectors. Additionally, when humans came on the scene to shoot vermin that might be harassing their flock, they would shoot the dark canines that threatened the herd....they could easily distinguish the WHITE canines as friend, not foe. So...obviously....white was an advantage.

JohnnyBandit says <<As I said.... A white dog "ghosts" it lights the heck up in the moonlight.... Almost glows.... Folks can argue all they choose.... It happens, I have seen it, and it freaks cattle out.... A light red dog will not do it... A light blue dog will not do it.... You also will not see any white horses working stock in hot climates for the same reason.>>

Oh, I've seen it...You are very correct. But I think your premise is wrong. It is rather easy to habituate a domesticated herd to working stock....regardless of color...but when push comes to shove...I'd rather KNOW that the vermin I am shooting at is the actual vermin, and not one of my own dogs. I've owned a lot of breeds...I've seen where even snippets of white in a dark backyard, especially when there is a moon, that I know EXACTLY where my dogs are in relation to whatever foe they may happen to decide to confront. I'm a hound enthusiast, because as someone said during this thread, as a "group" hounds as a whole are not concerned with color. While I agree with that, unfortunately, it is not true. Even hound breeds which purport "no color restrictions" there is a bias. Ask anybody about the all black nice whippet who won the breed at the televised westminster show on TV several years ago. The "powers" in that breed, no doubt were astounded and very few self colored dogs in that breed have NEVER again gained any sort of success. Ask ANY of the hound people who purport to say color is immaterial...and yet....they WON'T breed to that nice black dog, or the WON'T breed to the nice irish wolfhound with a white chest, or the nice afghan without a beard, or the ridgeback with white feet....in the "elite" world of purebred dogs, it is not about healthy genes, it is about winning...and when that "elite" world spreads LIES about color, they only succeed in reducing gene pools. I would hope we all know what THAT means.

JohnnyBandit also talks about white horses, or horses with a lot of white and how horrible THEY are regarding the cattle he has worked...sheesh....again...maybe he needs to pay more attention to his cattle than the animals which work them. Calmer cattle I would imagine produces better meat. But in any event...since he brings up horses....there is a definite bias in the horse racing community, which is taken from the GENERAL horse community, about white-socked horses...something to do with weakness in white-socked horses. Apparently, white socked horses somehow are "weaker" than solid-colored legs. Hmm....Secretariat had three white socks. I truly DOUBT any horse will ever equal his record-breaking record in all three of his triple crown races. There are SOOO many "old wives tales" regarding color when no scientific value exists. There ARE some REAL scientific health issues regarding white in many of our breeds, which is oddly ignored....in the quest for wins....it is ALL backwards...good white versus bad white....the BAD white while horrible is beautiful....the GOOD white while innocuous, doesn't produce winning dogs....HUMANS have created this quandry...and until we begin actually caring about dogs in general....there will be people who use it to care about themselves.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

PaddiB said:


> I'm very glad JohnnyBandit chimed in on this. I've offered some research later on in this post...because ACD's are sort of unique. JohnnyBandit also acknowledges that his expertise lies in with the ACD, and not other breeds. I have no doubt his personal experiences are what they are, there is no reason for me to disagree. For the cattle he works, white is an issue...but ACD's don't typically carry any significant white...it is a matter of light or dark, so in his experience, for the cattle he has worked, darker works better.
> 
> <<From BMC Veterinary research: "Univariable and multivariable analyses revealed a negative association between deafness and bilateral facial masks (odds ratio 0.2; P ≤ 0.001). Using multivariable logistic animal modelling, the risk of deafness was lower in dogs with pigmented body spots (odds ratio 0.4; P = 0.050).
> 
> ...


Oh Geeze.... I am not even sure where to start on this one......

But here goes......


> JohnnyBandit also acknowledges that his expertise lies in with the ACD, and not other breeds.


That is NOT what Johnny said... Not at all. Johnny said: 
_I am going to comment ONLY on ACDs and cattle herding dogs_

That meant that I was only answering concerning ACDs and cattle herding breeds. I have knowledge and experience with a lot of breeds....



> I'd rather KNOW that the vermin I am shooting at is the actual vermin, and not one of my own dogs.


Shooting at thinks you cannot positively identify in the dark is at the very least, foolish.... Negligent is a better word. IF light or dark is what you are basing your target on, you do not really know what you are shooting at.. 





> *.but ACD's don't typically carry any significant white...*


Also incorrect..... First of all.... A percentage of any ACDs individual hairs are white. The blue dogs are a mix of black and white hairs. The red dogs are a mix of red and white hairs. How light or dark an individual ACD is, depends on the ratio of white to colored hairs. 
ACDs throw several out of standard colors.... Including white, purple, a silver, chocolate, and black.

White being the most common of those.... And a white dog has a very high chance to being deaf. If it can hear it is likely a Uni (hears out of one ear) It is NOT the fact that the dog is white that causes the issue. But rather than to get the white you are doubling up on a bunch of recessive genes...... 




> so in his experience, for the cattle he has worked, darker works better.


Darker is NOT better... Darker gets HOT more easily.... Lighter is fine... Just NOT WHITE. 




> So let's discuss white as it pertains to how sheep, goats or cattle perceive it.....why are so many "flock guardians" all white?


Of course most guardians are light or even white... They are SUPPOSED to be....

What you do not understand.... IS a dog around stock is not a dog around stock..... 
Discussing LGD and Herding dogs.... Is like discussing apples and oranges. They are both fruits. But that is a similarity ends. 

First of all, it is FAR less common to use LGD with cattle than sheep, goats or other stock. But I digress.... The role of the LGD is to blend in with the stock. The dog blends in, lives with and becomes part of the flock or herd. The stock lives with the dog all the time. The dog is calm and gentle around the stock and just blends in unless their is a reason to act on a threat. 

A herding dog is a very different animal.... Herding is a predator behavior....... Different breeds do it different ways... But it is all predator. 

Hence a strange animal, exhibiting predator behavior that stands out like a sore thumb is going to get the stock over excited. 



> Additionally, when humans came on the scene to shoot vermin that might be harassing their flock, they would shoot the dark canines that threatened the herd....they could easily distinguish the WHITE canines as friend, not foe. So...obviously....white was an advantage.


You are attempting to use a completely different scenario, completely different type of dog, to validate your argument. 
LGD has nothing to do with Herding dogs. What is an advantage for one, is a disadvantage for another..... 



> But I think your premise is wrong.


It is not a premise and not wrong.... 
My statements were not made on assumptions. 



> It is rather easy to habituate a domesticated herd to working stock....


How much stock have you worked? 
And habituated is one thing.... But all the time stock is worked means little if you spook it. 


> I'm a hound enthusiast, because as someone said during this thread, as a "group" hounds as a whole are not concerned with color. While I agree with that, unfortunately, it is not true.


In actual working hounds it is in fact true.....



> JohnnyBandit also talks about white horses, or horses with a lot of white and how horrible THEY are regarding the cattle he has worked...sheesh....again..


The horse, which along with the rider, is pushing moving or controlling the cattle.... Again a predator behavior....



> .again...maybe he needs to pay more attention to his cattle than the animals which work them. Calmer cattle I would imagine produces better meat.


Calmer cattle I would imagine produces better meat..... Your assumption is wrong..... Temperament, demeanor, etc has not one thing with the quality of the beef.... Not one.... None...... Some breeds of cattle tend to be naturally calmer than others..... But you cannot (at least if you have any sense) choose the breed or crossbreed of cattle based on wanting calm stock. All breeds of cattle do not do equally well in all environments.... There are cattle that do better in cold environments, hot environments, wet environments, dry environments, etc. Generally the tropical breeds. Bos Indicus - Brahma and their relatives. Do better in Hot environments. The reasons are simple. Bos Indicus have sweat glands and they do well with a much wilder variety of forage. Brahma and Brahma cross cattle will do WELL on land that Angus would starve to death on. While the Breeds that originated Europe, The Bos Taurus breeds. Hereford, Angus, etc Have a better body type for beef production. These breeds produce better carcass yields, more marbling etc. Since two of the top five cattle states as well as some other very significant cattle states would be what is considered "hot". Texas, Florida etc. Compromises between climate adaptability and yield. Breeds like Santa Gertrudis, Brangus, Braford, Beefmaster, and a thousand combinations and crosses there of came about because of the efforts to combine hot weather tolerance along with marbling and carcass yield. Regardless of the breed.... Or cross.... It was found..... Long ago.... That if you retain in percentages of 3/8th Brahma and 5/8th European stock...... You retain most of the heat tolerance and forage adaptability of the Brahma type cattle, without losing much if any of the marbling and yield of the European breeds. 

While the European breeds have a general reputation of being affable and easily managed. And Brahma breeds have a general reputation of being testy and cantankerous.... Something happens when you cross bos taurus with bos indicus.... You get SQUIRRELLY!
Sometimes dangerously so..... 

But even more than breed bloodline, etc... Environment plays a HUGE role in a cows demeanor.... You can taste a wombat on crank crazy Santa Gertrudis... Pen him up behind the house, mess with him every day. Feed him, brush him, walk him on a lead... He will become quite gentle. 12 year old kid leading him around the ring at the state fair gentle. Conversely..... You can take a polled Hereford. Put him on a large range. Where he has to deal with wild animals, especially predators... Coyotes, cats, gators, etc. Oh and feral hogs... Hogs are big pain for cattle. He is going to become WARY and TESTY.... QUICK..... 


Bottom line..... PaddiB...... You can post your studies including your interpretations. Post your synopsis of what you THINK you know or read in the studies you look up.... You can even attempt to continue to twist folks words...... But what you know about herding, cattle, and how color plays a role, does not add up to half a stale peanut lost in the corner or a musty pool hall.....


----------



## upendi'smommy (Nov 12, 2008)

I just want to clarify on color Re aussies. This is what the breed standard states about color.

AKC:
"Color: Blue merle, black, red merle, red-all with or without white markings and/or tan (copper) 
points, with no order of preference. The hairline of a white collar does not exceed the point of the 
withers at the skin. White is acceptable on the neck (either in part or as a full collar), chest, legs, 
muzzle underparts, blaze on head and white extension from underpart up to four inches, 
measuring from a horizontal line at the elbow. White on the head should not predominate, and 
the eyes must be fully surrounded by color and pigment. Merles characteristically become darker 
with increasing age. Disqualifications - White body splashes, which means white on body 
between withers and tail, on sides between elbows and back of hindquarters in all colors."

And ASCA: 
COLOR:* All colors are strong, clear and rich.* The recognized colors are blue merle, red (liver) merle, solid black, and solid red (liver) all with or without white markings and/or tan (copper) points with no order of preference.* The blue merle and black have black pigmentation on nose, lips and eye-rims.* Reds and red merles have liver pigmentation on nose, lips and eye rims. Butterfly nose should not be faulted under one year of age. On all colors the areas surrounding the ears and eyes are dominated by color other than white.* The hairline of a white collar does not exceed the point at the withers.
Disqualifications:* Other than recognized colors.* White body splashes.* Dudley nose".


In no way are blazes frowned upon or minimal white dogs prefered. Aussies do carry for piebald, which I'm guessing is how white body splashes ended up a dq. Interestingly enough, I know of a puppy born out of two parents with fairly minimal white who ended up being piebald with lots of white (also sadly deaf), if you did not know her sire and dam you would have assumed she was a double merle.
*

This is a good resource for anyone curious about what is and isn't acceptable white in aussies. 
http://www.shalakoaussies.com/BreedStandard_WhiteMarkings.html


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

<<Bottom line..... PaddiB...... You can post your studies including your interpretations. Post your synopsis of what you THINK you know or read in the studies you look up.... You can even attempt to continue to twist folks words...... But what you know about herding, cattle, and how color plays a role, does not add up to half a stale peanut lost in the corner or a musty pool hall..... >>

So, just to be clear...I'm certainly not looking to sling insults as the above quote. That sort of thing doesn't further any sort of decent dialogue. I've commented more on this thread than what you have chose to rip. I believe I've already stated that certain herding breeds do have issues with white and medical issues regarding deafness...specifically due to many herding breeds have the merle gene. Obviously...my post you chose to rip apart makes me think #1 that you simply chose to disregard certain things I wrote, and #2 that you think research is, um, bad. Weird. 

I actually want to know the truth regarding what is good and bad regarding color in dogs in an actual scientific manner...not urban legend. Why, one might ask? Because there are a LOT of old wives tales out there in almost EVERY breed and those wives tales exist because at critical points in a breed's development, "powerful" people in that breed bred a certain color or certain "type" and in order to PROTECT themselves and THEIR particular vision, they, due to their position, were able to steer breed standards to what THEY were producing, and had the power to proclaim that "this" color or "that" color, or this "marking" or "that" marking was BAD. I'll give examples later, but I'll make this statement now...at a certain point...in certain breeds' histories, CERTAIN white genes in certain breeds of dogs were KNOWN to be BAD genes regarding a plethora of health issues such as deafness and kidney's and blindness, and skin issues....this had to do with certain white genes AND dilute genes. Again...it sounds like you haven't read my earlier posts on this issue.

I find it odd that just because you have your experiences, you automatically think that anybody who disagrees with you is horribly WRONG. While I don't PERSONALLY run cattle, I know of many people who do, as well as seeing such on documentary type programming. I got involved with herding several decades ago, when I was involved with competition obedience...and that was with my GSD's who I exposed to many different worlds, including herding and schutzhund. Interestingly...back then, border collies, actual working, successful border collies were ALL SORTS OF COLORS, including many who were almost all white, with some head patches and body speckling. They not only worked sheep, but cattle as well. Back then, the border collie folks were RABID to AVOID AKC recognition, because they KNEW that AKC recognition would lead to a generic, placid type dog that while successful in the show ring, was useless. There were at least two main registries at the time....one of them won out and now we see border collies in the show ring....ALL with the standard "irish markings," half drop ears, a certain coat length,and not the almost all white dogs, or half white dogs....we don't see the actual working dogs, who could be any color at all, some of who had erect ears and short coats.....But of course there are cattle ranchers out there who could care less about the show ring, yet use border collies on their cattle, even though border collies are known for sheep, find the border collie the best for that job....and some of those border collies are almost all white, some with prick ears...with less luxurious coats...etc etc. THEY don't seem to have a problem with the almost all white dogs working their cattle, so again...

I'm going to have to bring up perspective regarding JohnnyBandit....so he lives in the deep south where they move cattle at night because it is cooler, and he says in HIS experience, cattle seem to get spooked by the "ghostly white" of dogs. So....fine...I have no reason to dispute that, but the deep south is just one area of the country, and I KNOW that cattle in more northern states work cattle by DAY and not at night, and their WHITE cattle herding dogs pose no reaction from THEIR cattle...so how can he say categorically that HIS opinion is true across the board?

I made an off-handed remark regarding the nervousness of cattle being confronted by a white dog at night and the quality of meat....so JohnnyBandit goes into a couple paragraphs about his knowledge of cattle. He says, regarding my statement that calmer cattle produces better meat: "Your assumption is wrong..... Temperament, demeanor, etc has not one thing with the quality of the beef.... Not one.... None....>> I almost hate to bring this up...but he brought this up, so I'll comment...because, um, yes...I have researched this as well, long before this particular debate...non-stressed cattle DOES produce better meat...I suppose in your 40 years if you've only produced meat for McDonalds, quality wouldn't matter much. It is a strange attempt at skirting the issue...and the issue is the very first post in this whole discussion regarding white... in dogs. 

He has actually MADE my point....so he lives in the south and sees one thing....people that live in the north see another thing...so at the genesis of producing a "standard" for a new breed for what seems to be an "all-important" organization such as the AKC....who is more powerful at the time to offer a physical "standard?" I hope people remember that there was a time when there WAS no AKC...people simply bred dogs to perform certain functions....and yes, some of those functions were HORRIFYING regarding blood sports that today we denounce. There IS no rhyme or reason for many breeds of dogs to have certain color today and reject those from the beginning that actually produced most of the breeds.

I said I would give examples, and here they are...For the Irish Wolfhound..."Colour: Black, grey, brindle, red, and fawn, though white dogs were esteemed in former times, as is several times shown us - indeed they were often preferred - but for beauty the dark colours should be cultivated." For the rhodesian ridgeback: COLOURS: Brindles, fawns, sables, whole colours or mixed with white." Good luck finding historical reference to the border collie....I tried...and even found deviations from the written word as to what is correct and on the same page seeing an almost all white dog as also being correct...it is PEOPLE who subscribe to ALMOST every breed with color standards and pretty much never is a REASON given for the discrepancy between early standards and new standards. It is simply the FOLLY of humans, and the warped mind of powerful people at the time these standards were written as to what THEY think is right or wrong. One only has to look at the Scottish Deerhound standard to begin shaking their head as to "white markings." 

When a standard states, as it does in a lot of breeds, when white WANTS to be expressed...and not the BAD white which produces deafness or other issues...that it can only be a certain amount, or a size of "this or that" object....what the HECK are we doing? We are EFFECTIVELY reducing our gene pool FOR WHAT??? The quivering FEAR of the forefathers of any given breed who had inferior dogs but had a color that THEY deemed desireable???? This IS the real issue...this IS about dogs...and yet JohnneyBandit wants to both discredit me, and make this about cows. 


Johnny may know something about working cattle in the deep south, and he may have his preferences....but his environment is different than other environments and dogs he thinks are bad in his area work just great in other areas...which SHOULD caution people regarding standards, and I HOPE will let everyday people know when someone tells them their dog is not the "right color" they are giving a subjective opinion to an ABSURD notion that a dog's worth is tied to other people's flawed perception of how a dog's worth is determined. I've been there, and I've been successful "there." But a time came where I FINALLY realized that dogs are not standards and colors.....the worst dog from a shelter can be BETTER than the best dog from a breeder. I've seen it...I've lived it. 

This is about the worth of DOGS...and for someone to talk about my knowledge as stale peanuts or musty pool halls...well...fine...go ahead an truly try to breed what other people think of as correct....eventually you will encounter heart-ache, because gene pools are funny that way. When you try to reduce white to "quarter-sized" spots on chests, or "blazes not to exceed this or that" region...you may succeed in that visual world, but then you'll find yourself faced with a term that is becoming VERY POPULAR these days...and which is true... "unintended consequences."


----------



## CrimsonAccent (Feb 17, 2012)

PaddiB, I'm sorry. You might have great information but the way you express yourself makes your point _very_ difficult to understand.

Why does John being in the south lessen the credibility of his argument? I don't think the white-ness of dogs can be just confined to regions (although it could have an influence). I always thought ranching/cattle was more prominent in the south. If it's actually moved to the north, I would like to see numbers on that (as I am basing this off my own personal experience and not hard science).


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Texas is tops for cattle production but most of the other top 10 states aren't southern. http://www.cattlerange.com/cattle-graphs/all-cattle-numbers.html and I think PaddiB was saying that makes a difference because people up north don't work cattle in the dark. So they wouldn't care if a white dog looked ghost-y at night. 

I get PaddiB's point. A lot of times the "standard" colors in dogs are only because some rich/prominent old guy said so 150 years ago. That applies to a lot of things actually .


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

PaddiB said:


> <<Bottom line..... PaddiB...... You can post your studies including your interpretations. Post your synopsis of what you THINK you know or read in the studies you look up.... You can even attempt to continue to twist folks words...... But what you know about herding, cattle, and how color plays a role, does not add up to half a stale peanut lost in the corner or a musty pool hall..... >>
> 
> So, just to be clear...I'm certainly not looking to sling insults as the above quote. That sort of thing doesn't further any sort of decent dialogue. I've commented more on this thread than what you have chose to rip. I believe I've already stated that certain herding breeds do have issues with white and medical issues regarding deafness...specifically due to many herding breeds have the merle gene. Obviously...my post you chose to rip apart makes me think #1 that you simply chose to disregard certain things I wrote, and #2 that you think research is, um, bad. Weird.
> 
> ...



LOL okay...... Another thousand words going in a circle....


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

CrimsonAccent said:


> PaddiB, I'm sorry. You might have great information but the way you express yourself makes your point _very_ difficult to understand.
> 
> Why does John being in the south lessen the credibility of his argument? I don't think the white-ness of dogs can be just confined to regions (although it could have an influence). I always thought ranching/cattle was more prominent in the south. If it's actually moved to the north, I would like to see numbers on that (as I am basing this off my own personal experience and not hard science).


Johnny's cattle and beef industry experience are not limited to the South.... Or even the United States...

But Paddi is looking for a way to be correct..... It is just grasping at straws......


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Willowy said:


> Texas is tops for cattle production but most of the other top 10 states aren't southern. http://www.cattlerange.com/cattle-graphs/all-cattle-numbers.html and I think PaddiB was saying that makes a difference because people up north don't work cattle in the dark. So they wouldn't care if a white dog looked ghost-y at night.
> 
> I get PaddiB's point. A lot of times the "standard" colors in dogs are only because some rich/prominent old guy said so 150 years ago. That applies to a lot of things actually .


You posted a cattle INVENTORY.... Not production.

So Those numbers are a bit skewed..... 

Just with any set of numbers.... There are a bunch of ways to run statistics...

The statistics of several Southern States and ESPECIALLY Florida get thrown off in a graph like this.

Florida is a pure cow/calf state...

Meaning we have no grain here, temperatures are not conducive to weight gains and yields desired in the commercial beef industry....
There is no cattle processing to speak of down here. All of the packers are centered in the grain belt. 

So what happens here is we have brood cows and bulls. Cows get bred, cows give birth, as soon as the calves are weaned and eating grass, they are shipped out. To the midwest..... Kansas, Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, etc... Where the grain, feedlots, and packers are. So Florida cows, end up getting counted in other states herds as well. Depending how the numbers are run, Florida runs from as high as number 4 cattle state all the way down into the twenties...

The numbers also get skewed if you count gross dollars. Weaned calfs, are MUCH cheaper than fed ready to slaughter steers. 

The largest brood cow herd in the United States is on a Florida Ranch. That ranch is actually owned by the Mormon Church.... 

4 of the top ten ranches in calf production in the United States are in Florida. 

Florida has 4 million acres of improved pasture with another 4 to 6 million acres in broken pasture. Which translates to the fact that about 25 to 28 percent of all land in the state of Florida is in Cattle Operations. 

Almost a million weaned calves leave Florida for the midwest each year.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

JohnnyBandit said:


> White ACDs have a high chance of deafness.... But more importantly... (Not that a deaf dog is not important.... No one with a heart wants to produce a deaf dog.... ) but a white dog will spook your cattle, get you.... the dog and your cattle hurt......
> 
> My grandfather bred catahoulas and we used them on stock.... And you can take a line of catahoulas and get a dog with a high percentage of white.. Easily..... It take effort to keep the dogs darker.... We never went that way.... Because in the summer we would have to move cows around at night. Someone can say.... .Breeding for color is bad... But Granddaddy made an effort to keep his dogs marked up with color.... It kept everyone safer.
> 
> ...


Ah, yes! That does make sense ... now that I think about it, I have seen a predominantly white or all white dog make stock nervous even during the day. And I will also say this, even though lincoln doesn't have very much white, what he does have shows up like a white shirt under a black light in a full moon. Heck, even Josefina almost glows, so perhaps she is too light as well (she is a rescue so we didn't have a "hand" so to speak in her breeding). 

With hunting dogs, like the dog Argentino, and most terriers, you WANT them to be white so they stick out against the quarry. 

And why would "breeding for color" be a bad thing? Breeders who breed to standard and to better their breed also must take into account the allowed colors and patterns of their breed, for example, JRTS can't have less than 51%white and all white dogs can occur but no one breeds for them on purpose, they are just breeding for 51% white or more.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

> And why would "breeding for color" be a bad thing? Breeders who breed to standard and to better their breed also must take into account the allowed colors and patterns of their breed, for example, JRTS can't have less than 51%white and all white dogs can occur but no one breeds for them on purpose, they are just breeding for 51% white or more.


Because it isn't really good for the breed. You're unnecessarily narrowing the gene pool. Say a JRT is an excellent dog---healthy, stable, conformationally sound---he/she would normally be a good choice for breeding. But that excellent dog has only, say, 40% white. So they don't use that dog for breeding. That dog is passed up for maybe a less healthy, less stable, less conformationally sound dog that has the "proper" amount of white. When there isn't any reason that JRTs need to have more than 51% white except some old dude said so. That is definitely a bad thing.


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> And why would "breeding for color" be a bad thing? Breeders who breed to standard and to better their breed also must take into account the allowed colors and patterns of their breed, for example, JRTS can't have less than 51%white and all white dogs can occur but no one breeds for them on purpose, they are just breeding for 51% white or more.


Because anytime you take a healthy dog out of the breeding pool, you are unnecessarily limiting yourself, and hurting the breed.


----------



## upendi'smommy (Nov 12, 2008)

For what it's worth I've seen many a mismarked dog bred given that they have other qualities that give merit to breeding them and it isn't a mismark associated with health issues ie excessive head white in aussies.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Willowy said:


> Because it isn't really good for the breed. You're unnecessarily narrowing the gene pool. Say a JRT is an excellent dog---healthy, stable, conformationally sound---he/she would normally be a good choice for breeding. But that excellent dog has only, say, 40% white. So they don't use that dog for breeding. That dog is passed up for maybe a less healthy, less stable, less conformationally sound dog that has the "proper" amount of white. When there isn't any reason that JRTs need to have more than 51% white except some old dude said so. That is definitely a bad thing.


I really don't think you understand pure bred dog breeding, it is clear you have a bias against it so anyone who selectively breeds for one thing or another. Breeding for color is no different than someone who cuts a dog out of their breeding program because they don't have working instinct. The dog is an otherwise awesome dog, healthy, passes all its genetic and health testing etc .... so why is excluding a dog from the breeding program based on color any different if the dog is healthy in every other aspect?

Also JohnnyBandit just explained why a white herding or working dog is a bad thing, white heeding dogs are a safety risk to the dog and their handlers!


----------



## Gumiho (Mar 16, 2013)

Willowy said:


> Because it isn't really good for the breed. *You're unnecessarily narrowing the gene pool*. Say a JRT is an excellent dog---healthy, stable, conformationally sound---he/she would normally be a good choice for breeding. But that excellent dog has only, say, 40% white. So they don't use that dog for breeding. That dog is passed up for maybe a less healthy, less stable, less conformationally sound dog that has the "proper" amount of white. When there isn't any reason that JRTs need to have more than 51% white except some old dude said so. That is definitely a bad thing.



That depends on what the goal is and how its being done. If the goal is to maintain a certain percentage of color or avoiding merle to merle breedings or extreme white... There is no need to reduce the gene pool, its simply a matter of selecting correct pairings. A dog with too much white or poor markings can still be bred, but to a mate that is likely to reduce the amount of white or markings present in the offspring. 

The only exceptions would be more along the lines of culling out dogs that will pass on known genetic weaknesses tied to a specific color. Such as Albino Dobermans. Albino is not just a matter of color preference, the "color" (or rather lack of) actually has its own basket of health issues. And in a breed already unhealthy, keeping the Zfactored dogs in the breeding pool and bringing in MORE issues is not a benefit, the cons of that portion of the gene pool outweigh the benefits of using the dogs. Especially when there are other, less used independent breeding pools in the breed that aren't generally tapped (not many breeders cross show & working lines in Dobes, for example. Which allows the two portions of the breed population to develop largely independently of each other and outcrossing to such lines would significantly lower COI in many lines, but require a couple generations to bring type & working ability back to where its wanted.)

Again, its not a "one size fits all" type of issue.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Gumiho said:


> That depends on what the goal is and how its being done. If the goal is to maintain a certain percentage of color or avoiding merle to merle breedings or extreme white... There is no need to reduce the gene pool, its simply a matter of selecting correct pairings. A dog with too much white or poor markings can still be bred, but to a mate that is likely to reduce the amount of white or markings present in the offspring.
> 
> The only exceptions would be more along the lines of culling out dogs that will pass on known genetic weaknesses tied to a specific color. Such as Albino Dobermans. Albino is not just a matter of color preference, the "color" (or rather lack of) actually has its own basket of health issues. And in a breed already unhealthy, keeping the Zfactored dogs in the breeding pool and bringing in MORE issues is not a benefit, the cons of that portion of the gene pool outweigh the benefits of using the dogs. Especially when there are other, less used independent breeding pools in the breed that aren't generally tapped (not many breeders cross show & working lines in Dobes, for example. Which allows the two portions of the breed population to develop largely independently of each other and outcrossing to such lines would significantly lower COI in many lines, but require a couple generations to bring type & working ability back to where its wanted.)
> 
> Again, its not a "one size fits all" type of issue.


agreed, a dog that is mis marked can still be bred to a dog that has correct markings to see if the offsprings markings will be correct. And some people do do that, but the dog just can't be shown in confirmation. My own dog is a good example of that, he is a great conformationally correct dog in every other way shape or form other than the fact that he is going to be too tall for the standard, but if he does pass all his genetic and health tests I still hope to try and breed him to a small female and maybe get puppies that are within the standard. But that is many years away and is not set in stone yet. many other factors will contribute to if this happens or not it is just an idea, a pipe dream.

I also would like to add that I consider temperament and disposition within the breed standard to be a heck of a lot more important then markings that are correct. Sure markings are important more important than some breeds and others because they are a health concern, but if we are sacrificing temperament and disposition for markings then it is not ethical in my opinion.


----------



## BigLittle (May 28, 2014)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it's pretty common in boxers to keep extreme white dogs and breed them to solid dogs to produce the flashy marked ones for conformation events.

Then you have pied mastiffs, where whole chunks of the breeding population are put to an end because a litter had spots; spots that were in the purebred dogs a century ago... But what's going on there is widely recognized as stupid.


----------



## Beta Man (Apr 2, 2015)

My upcoming Dogo pup (I would have him now) was deaf. Breeder gave me the choice of still getting him with the stipulation that he neutered him prior to shipping. He is a beautiful dog, but training a deaf dog around small children was a put-off, and the early neuter was a deal breaker.


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

<<Texas is tops for cattle production but most of the other top 10 states aren't southern. http://www.cattlerange.com/cattle-gr...e-numbers.html and I think PaddiB was saying that makes a difference because people up north don't work cattle in the dark. So they wouldn't care if a white dog looked ghost-y at night. I get PaddiB's point. A lot of times the "standard" colors in dogs are only because some rich/prominent old guy said so 150 years ago. That applies to a lot of things actually . >>

Thank you, Willowy, that was exactly what I was trying to say. I was certainly not trying to "discredit" JohnnyBandit...and I believe I said that...only that regions do make a difference in how people view color in dogs, and it is dangerous in SOME breeds to denounce a certain color based on regional differences. The only thing, Willowy....is that it is not always rich, old guys...young prominent rich guys have made mistakes.....it is not about that...it is not even about money...it is about certain things being decided at certain times....I know in a lot of breeds....the older, more experienced people (regardless of monetary worth) tried to stem truly bad decisions....but younger people sometimes like to push the "old" people out of sight....it works both ways. 

But like I said....thanks for understanding. Montana has a huge cattle industry...they deal with shorter days most times of the year.


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

<<But Paddi is looking for a way to be correct..... It is just grasping at straws...... >>

So, again, I don't know how much more I can do to VALIDATE JohnnyBandits position in his world, but that there ARE other worlds beyond his. I'm not "looking" for a way to be correct, I just know that cattle ranchers in more northern areas run cattle with dogs of ALL colors, and some of those dogs are mostly WHITE. Working border collie breeders in those areas DON'T breed for color. I just find it sad that someone seems to either have a complex in insecurity, or a complex of needing to be right, to not accept someone else's experience....and simply say that one is "grasping at straws." Some of the best stock dogs I have seen are actually dogs of colors that would be laughed out of show rings. They AREN'T pretty...one ear semi-erect, one ear totally erect...mostly white but with heavy ticking...oddly patched dogs...really short coats opposed to what the "show rings" currently desires (even though "short" doesn't mean not thick and protective). These are people whose dogs, if they happen to be more white and the cows act up...the DOGS make them learn to behave...like I said...I can't speak for what happens in the deep south...perhaps they never allowed their more white dogs to take charge, and simply culled them. Dogs ARE smarter than cattle. But I'm not grasping for straws.

<<So what happens here is we have brood cows and bulls. Cows get bred, cows give birth, as soon as the calves are weaned and eating grass, they are shipped out. To the midwest..... Kansas, Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, etc... Where the grain, feedlots, and packers are. So Florida cows, end up getting counted in other states herds as well. Depending how the numbers are run, Florida runs from as high as number 4 cattle state all the way down into the twenties...>>

So I guess we could go down the road of mass production of beef in this country...which I think is deplorable...but I who is to say Johnny isn't trying to avert people's attention by talking about numbers with cattle, instead of actually talking about the dogs...so heck...who is grasping at straws here?


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

PaddiB said:


> <<Texas is tops for cattle production but most of the other top 10 states aren't southern. http://www.cattlerange.com/cattle-gr...e-numbers.html and I think PaddiB was saying that makes a difference because people up north don't work cattle in the dark. So they wouldn't care if a white dog looked ghost-y at night. I get PaddiB's point. A lot of times the "standard" colors in dogs are only because some rich/prominent old guy said so 150 years ago. That applies to a lot of things actually . >>
> 
> Thank you, Willowy, that was exactly what I was trying to say. I was certainly not trying to "discredit" JohnnyBandit...and I believe I said that...only that regions do make a difference in how people view color in dogs, and it is dangerous in SOME breeds to denounce a certain color based on regional differences. The only thing, Willowy....is that it is not always rich, old guys...young prominent rich guys have made mistakes.....it is not about that...it is not even about money...it is about certain things being decided at certain times....I know in a lot of breeds....the older, more experienced people (regardless of monetary worth) tried to stem truly bad decisions....but younger people sometimes like to push the "old" people out of sight....it works both ways.
> 
> But like I said....thanks for understanding. Montana has a huge cattle industry...they deal with shorter days most times of the year.


First of all Willowy's statistics are cattle inventory..... Not actual production. 


> but I who is to say Johnny isn't trying to avert people's attention by talking about numbers with cattle, instead of actually talking about the dogs...so heck...who is grasping at straws here?


Willowy brought this up.....Not me..... But what the heck..... Use it to attempt to make you look right...... Nice try there...



> I just find it sad that someone seems to either have a complex in insecurity, or a complex of needing to be right, to not accept someone else's experience....


This describes you to a T..... But what the heck.... Try to flip it back on me...... Another nice try.... 



> I have seen are actually dogs of colors that would be laughed out of show rings. They AREN'T pretty...one ear semi-erect, one ear totally erect...mostly white but with heavy ticking...oddly patched dogs...really short coats opposed to what the "show rings" currently desires (even though "short" doesn't mean not thick and protective). These are people whose dogs, if they happen to be more white and the cows act up...the DOGS make them learn to behave...like I said...I can't speak for what happens in the deep south...perhaps they never allowed their more white dogs to take charge, and simply culled them. Dogs ARE smarter than cattle. But I'm not grasping for straws.


Why are you bringing show dogs into this? We were talking about working stock dogs.... Who cares about the ears, etc. etc... 
You are all over the place as usual...... Trying to spin yourself right....Again....


You keep suggesting.... Or attempting to suggest.... My world and knowledge is limited to the deep south when it comes to ranching. It is not.... 
But keep trying....


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

Willowy says: <<Because it isn't really good for the breed. You're unnecessarily narrowing the gene pool. Say a JRT is an excellent dog---healthy, stable, conformationally sound---he/she would normally be a good choice for breeding. But that excellent dog has only, say, 40% white. So they don't use that dog for breeding. That dog is passed up for maybe a less healthy, less stable, less conformationally sound dog that has the "proper" amount of white. When there isn't any reason that JRTs need to have more than 51% white except some old dude said so. That is definitely a bad thing. >>

OwnedbyACDs says "I really don't think you understand pure bred dog breeding, it is clear you have a bias against it so anyone who selectively breeds for one thing or another. Breeding for color is no different than someone who cuts a dog out of their breeding program because they don't have working instinct. The dog is an otherwise awesome dog, healthy, passes all its genetic and health testing etc .... so why is excluding a dog from the breeding program based on color any different if the dog is healthy in every other aspect?"

Okay....so even though this discussion may be tough...it is important...and I find it rather offensive that OwnedbyACDs is telling Willowy that he/she doesn't "understand" pure bred dog breeding, and further that he/she has a clear "bias." I find that odd when later OwnedbyACDs is willing to breed a dog out of standard. Still shaking my head...who understands what here and who has a bias???

Here is the thing about "working dog" breeders....and not working dog in the sense of the working dog "GROUP" although they can be intermingled. I USED to think that STRICTLY performance and/or working dog breeders were the "salvation" of many breeds....until, of course, I got INVOLVED with them...as I did with actual herding folk, and schutzhund folk, hunting folk and many OTHER working dog breeders...who HATED "show dogs." Guess what? I found out that the "show breeders" who ignored health issues because their dog was a "star" in the show ring, actually mirrored the strictly PERFORMANCE people who had stars in in the performance arena...many of those performance dogs couldn't pass basic genetic screenings either...but they WERE BRED, because performance people thought they were somehow more "enlightened" because their dogs "did" things rather than just be show dogs. Well guess what...bad hips, bad thyroid, bad this or that makes supposedly "working-bred" dogs just as unhealthy as "show-bred" dogs. Hey Wes, pay attention to this regarding your beloved GSDs! And it is not just GSDs, it is a LOT of breeds.

Willowy GETS it. He/she is DOES understand what is involved with breeding purebred dogs and he/she DOESN'T have a bias....he/she DOES have a very healthy concern that certain strict color "rules" in fact, DOES reduce gene pools for no other reason that the fancy of humans. He/she brings up the JRT...which I assume encompasses the Parson Russell terrier and the new Russell terrier breed, of course not to be confused with the JACK RUSSELL. One dog....three "breeds" designed to do one or two jobs...um.....so tell me....WHO IS RIGHT???? THAT particular discussion, I'm sure would produce a flurry of responses...but it is a RHETORICAL question. If you look at the terrier world....there are a LOT of terriers who look a LOT alike....most of them were bred for basically the SAME purpose...the DIFFERENCE???? Sometimes geographical, sometimes specific work, but MOSTLY because the finite differences in a group who basically did the same things became "breeds" during the Victorian era when "dog show" became a "thing" and people wanted to distinguish their terriers from other terriers based on things such as color and coat length, and minute differences in leg length, etc etc. Many breeds today used to belong to other breeds, but now in the show world...they are different...such as norwich vs norfolk. 

Let's look at cocker spaniels....is color THAT important for what they did??? Obviously, because it seems that instead of people in that breed agreeing that all colors are permissible, they compromised having THREE DIFFERENT "varieties""....ALL simply due to COLOR...wow, really? The belgian breeds used to be judged as one breed....not anymore....there was no "REASON" to produce either the miniature or the toy poodle from the original standard poodle, except that PEOPLE wanted them. Same for the schnauzer....PEOPLE had a fancy to breed both giant an miniature versions. I could go on and on.

Willowy understands breeding purebred dogs very well, and I don't think Willowy has a bias...but is asking some very pointed questions REGARDING purebred dogs. And, if JohnnyBandit would think about it....all of these old wives tales are just that. Northern cattle ranchers DON'T have issues with COLOR...they actually could care less about "purebreds"....they just want dogs to do a job....and they don't have to be "purebred to fulfill that, and I think people who defend the restrictions, get scared about the truth.


----------



## BigLittle (May 28, 2014)

Most working dogs out where I live are generic English Shepherd type dogs...not even purebred. And most of Johnny's observations hold true in the central California savannah where it can get up to 110 degrees with low humidity.


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

<<Why are you bringing show dogs into this? We were talking about working stock dogs.... Who cares about the ears, etc. etc... 
You are all over the place as usual...... Trying to spin yourself right....Again....>>

I'm getting a bit weary of the fact that just because I disagree with you, and despite all of the historical issues I've brought up, you keep trying to discredit ME, instead of defending your dark dogs in the deep south. It's okay....even though I get weary of it, I'll stay on point. The reason I bring up show dogs is because the standards in place create the very myths that YOU have that I am trying to dispel. You want people to think I am all over the place, but NOTHING I have said can't be confirmed with simple research. Please, I am asking you, instead of calling me names or throwing darts at me, please feel free to discuss the issues I've brought up. There are a LOT of breeds in trouble today because people, like you who DON'T know everything, think one color is preferred over another. There were a LOT of breeds, prior to the Victorian Era, who were EXTREMELY successful doing whatever jobs they did who sported a LOT of different colors and markings. Some people who happened to be in power at times when STANDARDS were written, who owned and bred a small percentage of those dogs, NARROWED the standards to only include their own dogs....which happened to ELIMINATE a lot of GOOD dogs from the gene pool. On what? 25% white....40% white....fawn versus brindle versus sable versus this or that, that or this...legs this long versus legs that long....one coat length versus another? One size versus another? Why have two varieties of Collies concerning coat length? Um...could it be that the northern most regions needed more warmth than a more southern region? I guess I just don't understand why you think that "southern" cattle, who seem to have an issue with a dog who has more white in the dark, can be different than whiter dogs in northern regions who don't work cattle at night. I've also known people who employ guardian breeds (who are "white" (cream) that also are able to herd their breeds into one pasture or another...whatever makes you not address the issue at hand, and instead simply try to vilify me, hopefully most people will see what is going on here. 

There are misconceptions about color that have no basis in FACT.


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

By the way, JohnnyBandit....what does the little tag at the end of your posts mean? "Dog VooDoo Crappola"


----------



## BigLittle (May 28, 2014)

I know you're not directing this at me but...


> There are a LOT of breeds in trouble today because people, like you who DON'T know everything, think one color is preferred over another. There were a LOT of breeds, prior to the Victorian Era, who were EXTREMELY successful doing whatever jobs they did who sported a LOT of different colors and markings. Some people who happened to be in power at times when STANDARDS were written, who owned and bred a small percentage of those dogs, NARROWED the standards to only include their own dogs....which happened to ELIMINATE a lot of GOOD dogs from the gene pool. On what? 25% white....40% white....fawn versus brindle versus sable versus this or that, that or this...legs this long versus legs that long....one coat length versus another? One size versus another?


Those are SHOW breeds. Their breed standards have literally NOTHING to do with unregistered farm collies. Nothing. If a farm collie works the cattle well, it doesn't get culled. Because it has no breed standard.



> I've also known people who employ guardian breeds (who are "white" (cream) that also are able to herd their breeds into one pasture or another


Again, NOTHING to do with farm collies. Flock guardians lead the herd, they don't scare and chase the herd around. There is literally nothing to really be compared here, except the fact that flock guardians are in fact bred for color,too, based on "superstition"... If a dog doesn't blend in with the flock, it's culled. You want it to look like the flock so predators can't tell what's a dog and what's a sheep, goat, etc.



> There are misconceptions about color that have no basis in FACT.


Two people from two different states corroborated his observation. No basis in fact?


----------



## SirviRavenWind (Dec 1, 2014)

PaddiB said:


> Let's look at cocker spaniels....is color THAT important for what they did??? Obviously, because it seems that instead of people in that breed agreeing that all colors are permissible, they compromised having THREE DIFFERENT "varieties""....ALL simply due to COLOR...wow, really? The belgian breeds used to be judged as one breed....not anymore....there was no "REASON" to produce either the miniature or the toy poodle from the original standard poodle, except that PEOPLE wanted them. Same for the schnauzer....PEOPLE had a fancy to breed both giant an miniature versions. I could go on and on.


There was a reason why there are 3 varieties shown in the cocker. and yes it does have to do with color and pattern. I think that it should not matter but it gets the other ones out there. I would hate for one color to disappear for no other reason then to just have one color for the breed. There are many colors in cockers that are not recognized for showing for several reasons that may change.. Size is also an important thing as well, as the cocker is also a size variation in and of itself.

The ACS has 20 colors with most(13) of those being able to be shown with 2 out of 4 markings being allowed.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

PaddiB said:


> I'm getting a bit weary of the fact that just because I disagree with you, and despite all of the historical issues I've brought up, you keep trying to discredit ME, instead of defending your dark dogs in the deep south. .


I am not discrediting you..... You are discrediting yourself.... 

You say they use white dogs to herd up north..... To that I say two things.....

1) My work has taken me all over the west and in to Canada.... Ranches, Feedlots etc. Been doing it since the mid 1980's. I have seen all sorts of herding dogs. But have yet to see a predominantly white one...

2) The bigger question is..... IF someone wanted one of these white herding dogs.... Where would they go about finding said dog? 
Aside from the Samoyed... Which could be argued if they are actually a herding dog, there are not herding breeds that are predominantly white... You can get as exotic as you like. McNabbs, Hanging Trees, Etc.... There just are not white herding dogs to be had....

You CAN breed white dogs in Collies, Border Collies, Aussies, even ACDs.... but to get white, you have to be doing some very dangerous things... Now would be a good time for you to google Lethal white.

You keep trying to twist in the show dog aspect of this.... And since you like to post links so much...

Here are a few working registries... Not AKC, FCI, etc... These are the working registries.

ASCA...

http://www.asca.org/aboutaussies/breedstandard

COLOR: All colors are strong, clear and rich. The recognized colors are blue merle, red (liver) merle, solid black, and solid red (liver) all with or without white markings and/or tan (copper) points with no order of preference. The blue merle and black have black pigmentation on nose, lips and eye-rims. Reds and red merles have liver pigmentation on nose, lips and eye rims. Butterfly nose should not be faulted under one year of age. On all colors the areas surrounding the ears and eyes are dominated by color other than white. The hairline of a white collar does not exceed the point at the withers.
Disqualifications: Other than recognized colors. White body splashes. Dudley nose.

Border Collies

http://www.bordercollie.org/basics/characteristics.html


While a group of one hundred Border Collies will probably look as if they belong to the same breed, they will not have a uniform appearance. Since a "good" dog can be judged only by its herding performance, there is no "breed standard" of appearance to which Border Collies should conform. In general, they are of medium size (25-55 pounds), with coats that may be smooth, medium, or rough. Colors are black, black with tan, and, less common, reddish-brown, all usually with white markings. Predominantly white Border Collies and merles, though unusual, also occasionally appear.

Though they do not have prejudice against it, a white working BC is an anomaly.......

http://www.englishshepherd.org/

In none of the color patterns is white permitted to be unbalanced to a degree of being splotchy-looking or of covering more than 30% of the body. Solid white coats or piebald markings are not desirable. Merles do not appear in the English shepherd.

Working Kelpies? Nope no white there.

http://www.wkc.org.au/About-Kelpies/Colour-Range.php


Catahoulas.... There are a bunch of working registries for this breed....

they all have one thing in common.....


Serious fault: 70 percent or more white.

Disqualification: 90 percent or more white coat color; solid white head; albinism.


You are so intent on being correct.... Giving us thousand word posts to awe us with your knowledge.... That you cannot realize that you are so incorrect no matter how much you twist, you ain't getting back there....


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

BigLittle said:


> I know you're not directing this at me but...
> 
> Those are SHOW breeds. Their breed standards have literally NOTHING to do with unregistered farm collies. Nothing. If a farm collie works the cattle well, it doesn't get culled. Because it has no breed standard.
> 
> ...


Another name for Farm Collie is the English Shepherd..... I have seen and been around a zillion of these in my life and have yet to see a white one. 

There actually is a working registry for the breed with a working standard. And they do NOT like white.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I know several working BC people that have predominately white dogs. Several have color headed whites/extreme piebalds.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

PaddiB said:


> By the way, JohnnyBandit....what does the little tag at the end of your posts mean? "Dog VooDoo Crappola"


Well sometime.... Late 1980's or so, I was doing a lot of training for a husband and wife that owned a dog training service. They were farming out some of their problem behavior cases to me.... I have always loved working on a problem behavior.
He coined the term after I helped a dog that some thought was beyond help and frankly not safe. Then when he had work for me he would call me up and say.... I need you to go do some of your dog voodoo crappola on this client's dog.. 
I have always thought it was funny so I keep it around.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> I know several working BC people that have predominately white dogs. Several have color headed whites/extreme piebalds.


It happens. I said as much and the working BC organization is not opposed to it. But such a dog is still an anomaly.. If a breeder is regularly producing that... they are running towards a genetic dead end.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Oh Look....

I found a white cow dog...


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

for those who want information on cow behavior. http://www.grandin.com/references/new.corral.html http://animals.mom.me/cattle-colorblind-1974.html
there are several all white breeds of dogs that have been used to herd cattle. And with it s vision a light tan dog would look white to a cow. a black and white dog would look like a shadowed type of dog/ The most important thing when working dogs around cows is to have the cows/cattle used to working with dogs because no matter what the color of the dog a cow not used to working with dogs could becomes scared and run for the hills so to speak.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

luv mi pets said:


> there are several all white breeds of dogs that have been used to herd cattle.


Name them.... 



> And with it s vision a light tan dog would look white to a cow.


No they will not... 
There is no color.... That creates as much contrast at night as white.... A tan dog would be quite muted....
" cows tend to be sensitive to stark contrasts in color Cattle will avoid water when it has harsh reflections from the sunlight. If having calm cattle matters to you, paint as many things in the same scheme as possible -- a dark fence in front of a red barn, for example."
You may think the link you posted contradicts my posts... But they actually support them.


----------



## Remaru (Mar 16, 2014)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Another name for Farm Collie is the English Shepherd..... I have seen and been around a zillion of these in my life and have yet to see a white one.
> 
> There actually is a working registry for the breed with a working standard. And they do NOT like white.


English Shepherds may be referred to as farm collies but they are not the only breed that goes by that name. The farm collies I grew up with were actual collies not English Shepherds. I have actually never seen an English Shepherd that I am aware of, I grew up with these dogs

http://www.scotchcollie.org/

All over my uncle's and then my cousin's farms. My uncle (and my cousin) raised cattle. They were just farm bred collies. Lad's mother is a farm bred working collie from a long line of farm bred working collies (her breeder has a cattle ranch too). I have seen farm bred, working BCs referred to as farm collies as well. I would not say that "Another Name for Farm Collie is the English Shepherd."


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Name them....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think the Icelandic sheepdog can be predominantly white, can they not (correct me if I am wrokg, though)? Though uo there in the great white north ... can't Imagine being white matters anyway


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> I think the Icelandic sheepdog can be predominantly white, can they not (correct me if I am wrokg, though)? Though uo there in the great white north ... can't Imagine being white matters anyway


No, Icelandic sheepdogs do not come in white, they have white markings, but are never predominantly white, and they are used to herd sheep, not cattle.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Kuma'sMom said:


> No, Icelandic sheepdogs do not come in white, they have white markings, but are never predominantly white, and they are used to herd sheep, not cattle.


Than I guess that might cement the argument that white in a herding/working dog is not desirable for reasons that it spooks the stock then? Because if they don't prefer white in a country called Iceland, then maybe there might be some truth to the "white spooks stock" theory.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Honestly, I kind of don't buy it. Why couldn't cattle acclimate to a white herder if they can acclimate to a white LGD? I dig that the movement is different but any animal, even wild animals, can acclimate to various stimuli. Cows aren't rocket scientists but there's no reason they couldn't habituate to a white dog, or no breed used on cattle could EVER have any white. Corgis, Australian shepherds, etc. What's the difference between a white collar that goes past the shoulder vs doesn't, to a cow? 

Sounds like one of those things that is partially based in reality, partially based on tradition to me.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

sassafras said:


> Sounds like one of those things that is partially based in reality, partially based on tradition to me.


They had that discussion on the BC boards and decided it was mostly based on myth/prejudice. But I'm too lazy to search through for it. Several people had mostly white dogs who worked cows and sheep. Piebald isn't uncommon in working BCs. Obviously no one is breeding for solid white since in BCs it would be the 'bad' kind of solid white but I've seen it. And I've seen high white piebalds (think the way my 3 are colored). Solid white dogs with a colored head, etc.

Anyways, I don't buy it either.

Icelandic sheepdogs come in piebald as well, btw. I don't know about solid white but I've seen a few greater than 50% white

Shelties also come in mostly white. OES have a lot of white. etc

White BC working cows: http://www.bandbbordercollies.com/Bea Pedigree.htm
Another: http://skyviewbordercollies.com/pig page.htm
Willie on the bottom of the page: http://www.stockdog.us/train.htm
Tess: http://www.bandbbordercollies.com/Testimonials.htm
Archie: http://www.workingsheepdog.co.uk/category/cattle-dogs-for-sale/
http://www.bordercolliemuseum.org/BCLooks/PatWhite/PatWhite.html
http://www.bordercolliemuseum.org/BCLooks/Ticked/Ticked.html

I don't feel like digging through a bunch but I've seen plenty. Most common pattern? No. Not uncommon.


----------



## Avie (Jul 10, 2011)

White herding breed... Hmm...


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Laurelin said:


> They had that discussion on the BC boards and decided it was mostly based on myth/prejudice. But I'm too lazy to search through for it. Several people had mostly white dogs who worked cows and sheep. Piebald isn't uncommon in working BCs. Obviously no one is breeding for solid white since in BCs it would be the 'bad' kind of solid white but I've seen it. And I've seen high white piebalds (think the way my 3 are colored). Solid white dogs with a colored head, etc.
> 
> Anyways, I don't buy it either.
> 
> ...


I kind of agree, I am concerned about "pattern white" more for health concerns than the implications in their working ability/safety. I mean, merle dogs work stock and they are pretty light, and I am sure a merle dog would "ghost" at night (I have never owned a merle, so I dont know first hand), though, admittedly, not as much as a mostly white dog.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

All ACDs are extreme piebalds... 

Pattern white is the same color as many many breeds. There is a slight risk of deafness if the white falls poorly. But it is not a huge health concern. You already have bald/split faces in BCs and 'plain faces' in ACDs. Patterned white isn't more an issue than that. Most breeds require markings over eyes an ears for a reason.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

sassafras said:


> Honestly, I kind of don't buy it. Why couldn't cattle acclimate to a white herder if they can acclimate to a white LGD? I dig that the movement is different but any animal, even wild animals, can acclimate to various stimuli. Cows aren't rocket scientists but there's no reason they couldn't habituate to a white dog, or no breed used on cattle could EVER have any white. Corgis, Australian shepherds, etc. What's the difference between a white collar that goes past the shoulder vs doesn't, to a cow?
> 
> Sounds like one of those things that is partially based in reality, partially based on tradition to me.


Different scenario..... 

LGDs live with the stock 24/7.... they show no predatory behaviors. 

Stock dogs look and act very much to predators.... 

But in a sense you are correct... in a small property situation, the stock could and probably would acclimate. 
But on larger operations the stock often goes months after months without being worked by or even seeing the stock dogs.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> I kind of agree, I am concerned about "pattern white" more for health concerns than the implications in their working ability/safety. I mean, merle dogs work stock and they are pretty light, and I am sure a merle dog would "ghost" at night (I have never owned a merle, so I dont know first hand), though, admittedly, not as much as a mostly white dog.


 Merle dogs do not ghost at night....



Avie said:


> White herding breed... Hmm...


But where are they actually used on working operations?


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Laurelin said:


> All ACDs are extreme piebalds...
> 
> Pattern white is the same color as many many breeds. There is a slight risk of deafness if the white falls poorly. But it is not a huge health concern. You already have bald/split faces in BCs and 'plain faces' in ACDs. Patterned white isn't more an issue than that. Most breeds require markings over eyes an ears for a reason.


I know that a "plain face" is acceptable in ACDs, but I prefer markings on the eyes and ears.



JohnnyBandit said:


> Different scenario.....
> 
> LGDs live with the stock 24/7.... they show no predatory behaviors.
> 
> ...





JohnnyBandit said:


> Merle dogs do not ghost at night....
> 
> 
> But where are they actually used on working operations?


Also feedlots, who see a huge turnover of stock.

And thanks for clearing that up about if merle dogs ghosted at night or not. I have never owned a merle, nor seen one at night so I didnt know if they did or not. Are they in anyway more visible at night than a darker colored dog?

Also, there IS some truth to the "ghosting" of a white or mostly white dog spooking stock. last night, we had a full moon, now Lincoln is not light colored by any means, but he has a huge white chest and white legs, which showed up like beacons in the light of our full moon. Even the horses, who know him and me and see us almost every night taking our potty break, looked at him cross eyed for a bit before they realized who we were LOL. They ONLY do this at the full moon, when his white markings are the most visible. I can only imagine being in a pen at night with a bunch or wild cattle with an all white or mostly white dog LOL.


----------



## Avie (Jul 10, 2011)

JohnnyBandit said:


> But where are they actually used on working operations?


I was referring to I think you mentioning you couldn't think of a single white herding breed. The only reason white exists in GSDs and the only reason White Swiss shepherds exist at all is because somewhere far far ago in Germany shepherds did not distinguish between colors and used herding dogs with a white coat. Apparently Max von Stephanitz, GSD breed founder, thought one of those white dogs was so awesome he bred his founder dog Horand von Grafrath to a white bitch (according to one of previous posters). I do know Horand's grandfather was a white dog as well, named Greiff. White coats weren't strange in late 19th century German herding dogs. I don't see why there should be a bias against it nowadays. 

Ps. Mudik come in various colors, as well as feher -white! 









source 

Btw, what to think of the Puli and Pumi? 









source

And German Schafpudel? 









source


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Avie said:


> I was referring to I think you mentioning you couldn't think of a single white herding breed. The only reason white exists in GSDs and the only reason White Swiss shepherds exist at all is because somewhere far far ago in Germany shepherds did not distinguish between colors and used herding dogs with a white coat. Apparently Max von Stephanitz, GSD breed founder, thought one of those white dogs was so awesome he bred his founder dog Horand von Grafrath to a white bitch (according to one of previous posters). I do know Horand's grandfather was a white dog as well, named Greiff. White coats weren't strange in late 19th century German herding dogs. I don't see why there should be a bias against it nowadays.
> 
> Ps. Mudik come in various colors, as well as feher -white!
> 
> ...


What kind of sheep are those?the ones with the twisted horns? Those are cool!


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Avie said:


> I was referring to I think you mentioning you couldn't think of a single white herding breed. The only reason white exists in GSDs and the only reason White Swiss shepherds exist at all is because somewhere far far ago in Germany shepherds did not distinguish between colors and used herding dogs with a white coat. Apparently Max von Stephanitz, GSD breed founder, thought one of those white dogs was so awesome he bred his founder dog Horand von Grafrath to a white bitch (according to one of previous posters). I do know Horand's grandfather was a white dog as well, named Greiff. White coats weren't strange in late 19th century German herding dogs. I don't see why there should be a bias against it nowadays.
> 
> Ps. Mudik come in various colors, as well as feher -white!
> 
> ...




You got me on the Puli and Pumi. White is allowed.

As for the white shepherds...... They exist because people wanted white dogs. The white in those breeds as with most whites is recessive. 
To get a line of all white dogs they had to exlude all colors but white. They isolated the recessive gene for white. 
What else did they isolate? 

The argument of some on this thread is the is a biased against white. But the thing is you do not have to be biased against white in MOST breeds to stay away from it. Sound breeding practices will do that on its own. Making a white dog an occasional thing at best. 

I thought I would look up some health data on the white shepherds compared to the GSD.... So I looked at the OFA database... There were not enough white shepherds to make any conclusions. They have only 75 hip evaluations on white shepherds on file. (with 26.7% of those being dysplastic. So a little over one in four dogs they tested had hip dysplasia) 
So in comparison. I looked up something Rare.... Something there is only a small population of.... 
Chinooks..... Well 728 of those have had OFA hip evaluations. 

That tells me something. The White Shepherd folks are not testing their dogs. The question is why.


----------



## Remaru (Mar 16, 2014)

Laurelin said:


> They had that discussion on the BC boards and decided it was mostly based on myth/prejudice. But I'm too lazy to search through for it. Several people had mostly white dogs who worked cows and sheep. Piebald isn't uncommon in working BCs. Obviously no one is breeding for solid white since in BCs it would be the 'bad' kind of solid white but I've seen it. And I've seen high white piebalds (think the way my 3 are colored). Solid white dogs with a colored head, etc.
> 
> Anyways, I don't buy it either.
> 
> ...


Collies also come in mostly white.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Remaru said:


> Collies also come in mostly white.


Yes and you have to work to get there. And engage in breeding practices that are less than sound..... Look up Lethal White. 

As for white Border *******:
"_*Predominantly white Border Collies and merles, though unusual, also occasionally appear.*_"
That is straight from the USBCC..... The organization for working BCs.. That will not write a standard calls white in BCs unusual...


----------



## Avie (Jul 10, 2011)

JohnnyBandit said:


> You got me on the Puli and Pumi. White is allowed.
> 
> As for the white shepherds...... They exist because people wanted white dogs. The white in those breeds as with most whites is recessive.
> To get a line of all white dogs they had to exlude all colors but white. They isolated the recessive gene for white.
> ...


I don't know why white shepherd people in the US don't test their dogs. :/ That doesn't sound like a responsible or smart thing to do. 

I can only speak for the health regulations of the breed club(s) in my own country when it comes to White Swiss shepherds, and hip dysplasia (among other health issues) is mandatorily screened for in breeding stock. OFA isn't used, we use another system where the results are HD-A, HD-B, HD-C and HD-D. HD-D's are severely dysplastic. HD-C's are dysplastic. HD-A's are normal. HD-B is a transition between normal and dysplastic. Breeding regulations often dictate HD-B and HD-C dogs may be bred, but only when bred to an HD-A. HD-D dogs are out. Most of the breeding population is HD-A or HD-B.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

ACDs are technically extreme piebalds. They are white with ticking/roaning.

Lethal white is a horse term but sometimes applies to double Merle's in dogs. Not the same as a color headed white or piebald dog.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> ACDs are technically extreme piebalds. They are white with ticking/roaning.
> 
> Lethal white is a horse term but sometimes applies to double Merle's in dogs. Not the same as a color headed white or piebald dog.


I am aware.....


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Avie said:


> I don't know why white shepherd people in the US don't test their dogs. :/ That doesn't sound like a responsible or smart thing to do.
> 
> I can only speak for the health regulations of the breed club(s) in my own country when it comes to White Swiss shepherds, and hip dysplasia (among other health issues) is mandatorily screened for in breeding stock. OFA isn't used, we use another system where the results are HD-A, HD-B, HD-C and HD-D. HD-D's are severely dysplastic. HD-C's are dysplastic. HD-A's are normal. HD-B is a transition between normal and dysplastic. Breeding regulations often dictate HD-B and HD-C dogs may be bred, but only when bred to an HD-A. HD-D dogs are out. Most of the breeding population is HD-A or HD-B.


It is good the white shepherd folks in Europe are testing.... For whatever reason they do not seem to be doing so here.


----------



## ChaosIsAWeim (Feb 12, 2011)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> What kind of sheep are those?the ones with the twisted horns? Those are cool!


They are Rackas.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

ChaosIsAWeim said:


> They are Rackas.


thanks.... I do not know squat about sheep.... 

I sell a TON of Lamb... But never learned the breeds.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I am aware.....


Then I am confused about why we are talking about lethal white... The only 'lethal white' in dogs (and thats still not really the right term) is double Merle. The solid white dogs posted here (pumi, mudi, etc) are recessive reds. The Shelties and collies are color headed white. No one is advocating double Merle.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> Then I am confused about why we are talking about lethal white... The only 'lethal white' in dogs (and thats still not really the right term) is double Merle. The solid white dogs posted here (pumi, mudi, etc) are recessive reds. The Shelties and collies are color headed white. No one is advocating double Merle.


I was not talking about color headed white.... Which is why I keep bringing up lethal white.

I am confused as well.... I do realize you may know several folks that have white or mostly white BCs.... But you and I both know it is not a common thing.... Unless a particular breeder is making an effort to breed whites...


----------



## Remaru (Mar 16, 2014)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I was not talking about color headed white.... Which is why I keep bringing up lethal white.
> 
> I am confused as well.... I do realize you may know several folks that have white or mostly white BCs.... But you and I both know it is not a common thing.... Unless a particular breeder is making an effort to breed whites...


White Collies, the white collies in the AKC standard are color headed white. So you were arguing with me for the sake of arguing then?


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Remaru said:


> White Collies, the white collies in the AKC standard are color headed white. So you were arguing with me for the sake of arguing then?


No not at all...


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I was not talking about color headed white.... Which is why I keep bringing up lethal white.
> 
> I am confused as well.... I do realize you may know several folks that have white or mostly white BCs.... But you and I both know it is not a common thing.... Unless a particular breeder is making an effort to breed whites...


In that post you talk about BCs and Collies... both of which come in piebald/color headed white.

I would not call mostly white BCs uncommon at all. As common as some other patterns? No. But not rare by any means. Solid white? Yeah that's very uncommon. I've only seen 2 and one was double merle.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> I would not call mostly white BCs uncommon at all. As common as some other patterns? No. But not rare by any means. Solid white?


I am aware that you do not call white Border Collies uncommon.... You have said that multiple times in this thread....

But the United States Border Collie Club DOES call them uncommon.... Actually the word they use is unusual....


But no... You are right..... They are NOT uncommon..... You KNOW exactly what you are talking about.........

The USBCC and I are both wrong......


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Just stating what I've seen. *shrug* I know whole families of piebald mostly white BCs. The one I am thinking of most is a sport bred litter but there's a decent amount working it seems. 

So what was it about lethal white?


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> Just stating what I've seen. *shrug* I know whole families of piebald mostly white BCs. The one I am thinking of most is a sport bred litter but there's a decent amount working it seems.


Yes... You are right and I am wrong.... White BC's are running all over the place....

Like I said.... The USBCC and myself are wrong.... White is common... They are all over the place..


----------



## Remaru (Mar 16, 2014)

JohnnyBandit said:


> No not at all...


No to which? You were not arguing for the sake of it or no AKC standard white collies are not color headed whites?


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Remaru said:


> No to which? You were not arguing for the sake of it or no AKC standard white collies are not color headed whites?


No I am not arguing with you...


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

You have changed your point so many times in this argument that I can't even decide where to start. You still haven't answered about the lethal whites?

My point and others is that there are some white dogs out there working cows and sheep. Several herding breeds come in white/mostly white. White is not a 'genetic dead end' as you call it (I have no idea what this is supposed to mean to be honest). 'Lethal white' is a term in horses primarily but when used in dogs is always (that I've seen) is double merles. You do not have to engage in breeding practices that are 'less than sound' to get a white collie or sheltie... because they come in piebald. You just have to breed two white factored dogs together. If breeding piebald is unsound then... lots of breeds are in trouble.

And yes, I DO know a good number of white piebald BCs with more or less white (some with a lot). More than some other colors of BC. Are all working dogs? No. Some are. 

And I'm done. Have fun.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> You have changed your point so many times in this argument that I can't even decide where to start. .


No.... My point has been exactly the same from the first post.....

But YOU are right...... White Border Collies..... Common....


----------



## Remaru (Mar 16, 2014)

JohnnyBandit said:


> No.... My point has been exactly the same from the first post.....
> 
> But YOU are right...... White Border Collies..... Common....


No, you don't seem to have one right now except being belligerent. Tell us about the "lethal white".


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Remaru said:


> No, you don't seem to have one right now except being belligerent. Tell us about the "lethal white".


Actually..... I am FAR from being belligerent..... 

Do I really have to tell either of you about lethal white? I would think you both know....

My point has been the same since my first post...

Folks can imagine what they like....


----------



## Remaru (Mar 16, 2014)

So again, what does lethal white (which isn't the correct term) have to do with shelties, collies or BCs which are piebald or color headed white? Why would you post telling me to look up "lethal white"? What point are you trying to make?


----------



## BigLittle (May 28, 2014)

The only "lethal white" in dogs I know of is double merle. Nobody except clueless people, owners of cryptic merles, and people trying to pump out as many merle dogs as possible are breeding it, so I'm not sure what point you were making with lethal white.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Remaru said:


> So again, what does lethal white (which isn't the correct term) have to do with shelties, collies or BCs which are piebald or color headed white? Why would you post telling me to look up "lethal white"? What point are you trying to make?


Well it is pretty simple.....

How do you get a white, collie....White BC..... White Aussie...

You know the answer to this, as does Laurelin.... 

When I bring it up.... You take a different direction.... Now you are talking head colored whites.... You NEVER used that term until I responded to you with lethal white....

YOU KNEW what I was talking about all along.... As did Laurelin on the white Border Collie thing... She knows, even mostly a mostly or significantly white BC is the exception rather than the rule....

But I am being belligerent.... I love the extremes some of ya'll go through.....


----------



## Remaru (Mar 16, 2014)

It is not my fault you misunderstood my post (which was not directed at you). I am not the one taking a different direction, if you go back and read my post you will see that I say "collies come in mostly white". The AKC Standard calls the color white which is what I said when I replied to you as well. I was never once talking about merle x merle dogs because white collies are not merle x merle. http://www.akc.org/dog-breeds/collie/detail/ here is the AKC standard listing "White" as the color. You are the only one who automatically thought "lethal white" so no, I am not the one changing directions. I have been talking about the exact same dogs the entire time. Nice try though.


----------



## Remaru (Mar 16, 2014)

Oh and you get a "white" collie by breeding two white collies together, or by breeding a white factored collie to a white collie...I'm going to assume that isn't the answer you were looking for.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Remaru said:


> It is not my fault you misunderstood my post (which was not directed at you). I am not the one taking a different direction, if you go back and read my post you will see that I say "collies come in mostly white". The AKC Standard calls the color white which is what I said when I replied to you as well. I was never once talking about merle x merle dogs because white collies are not merle x merle. http://www.akc.org/dog-breeds/collie/detail/ here is the AKC standard listing "White" as the color. You are the only one who automatically thought "lethal white" so no, I am not the one changing directions. I have been talking about the exact same dogs the entire time. Nice try though.


I did not misunderstand your post.....

You simply chose to change direction.....


----------



## Remaru (Mar 16, 2014)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I did not misunderstand your post.....
> 
> You simply chose to change direction.....


I'm out, it is just too important to you to be right.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Remaru said:


> Oh and you get a "white" collie by breeding two white collies together, or by breeding a white factored collie to a white collie...I'm going to assume that isn't the answer you were looking for.


I know how you get a white collie.... As did you, when you made your post....



Remaru said:


> I'm out, it is just too important to you to be right.


I already said I was wrong.... No.... You are right... As is Laurelin......


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I have no idea what is going on and what you are trying to argue. I just keep seeing my name and that I'm supposed to know things????


----------



## Remaru (Mar 16, 2014)

Laurelin said:


> I have no idea what is going on and what you are trying to argue. I just keep seeing my name and that I'm supposed to know things????


Because he has to be right and you and I keep "changing direction" to try to make him look wrong. That is all I can take away from this anyway. I guess the AKC is in on it too. Still not sure how that proves his original point or even what his original point was.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> I have no idea what is going on and what you are trying to argue. I just keep seeing my name and that I'm supposed to know things????


That goes for two of us...

You kept making this "white..... Mostly white.... Kept changing.... Border Collies are common... " Argument..
I have no idea what you are trying to prove.... You know good and well that even mostly white BCs are not common.... Yet you seem intent on making the point that they are...


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Remaru said:


> Because he has to be right and you and I keep "changing direction" to try to make him look wrong. That is all I can take away from this anyway. I guess the AKC is in on it too. Still not sure how that proves his original point or even what his original point was.


I don't have to be right.... YOU are right.... I am wrong..

If you cannot understand my point in all of this... Which is the same point I have had throughout this.....It is not my fault...


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Remaru said:


> Because he has to be right and you and I keep "changing direction" to try to make him look wrong. That is all I can take away from this anyway. I guess the AKC is in on it too. Still not sure how that proves his original point or even what his original point was.


And YOU brought up the AKC.... I never mentioned them... this is about working dogs.....


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

And Frankly.... I think a lot of both Remaru and Laurelin.....

Discussing this topic.... Which means nothing is NOT worth being at odds with either of you.......


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

One other all white dog used for herding is the Samoyed. I am sure Reindeer are a little bit more skittish than some cattle. But yes I was thinking of a Pumi, Puli, or a Canaan dog. A Canaan dog is described as mostly white with broad patterns of color as being an accepted color. Some of the hangin tree cowdogs are mostly white dog with patches of color. http://charliescowdogs.com/hangin-tree-cowdog.shtml And if that was true about white scaring cows than no cowboy would ever ride a white or gray horse near cattle or wear white shirts or hats. I have a hard time believing that statement. Plus if it was true than a quick google search would provide such information from cowdog websites. I am unable to find anything on that. If anyone can find anything on this subject I would love to read about that.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

luv mi pets said:


> One other all white dog used for herding is the Samoyed. I am sure Reindeer are a little bit more skittish than some cattle. But yes I was thinking of a Pumi, Puli, or a Canaan dog. A Canaan dog is described as mostly white with broad patterns of color as being an accepted color. Some of the hangin tree cowdogs are mostly white dog with patches of color. http://charliescowdogs.com/hangin-tree-cowdog.shtml And if that was true about white scaring cows than no cowboy would ever ride a white or gray horse near cattle or wear white shirts or hats. I have a hard time believing that statement. Plus if it was true than a quick google search would provide such information from cowdog websites. I am unable to find anything on that. If anyone can find anything on this subject I would love to read about that.


I mentioned Samoyed... But how many Samoyed work cows? And I mentioned white horses in my first post on this subject... 

And on this site.... The one you posted.... ONE of his dogs is mottled.... None are white. 
http://charliescowdogs.com/some-of-charlies-dogs.shtml


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

JohnnyBandit said:


> That goes for two of us...
> 
> You kept making this "white..... Mostly white.... Kept changing.... Border Collies are common... " Argument..
> I have no idea what you are trying to prove.... You know good and well that even mostly white BCs are not common.... Yet you seem intent on making the point that they are...


I was just saying they exist and some people use them and work them on stock seemingly just fine. That's about all I'm trying to say.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> I was just saying they exist and some people use them and work them on stock seemingly just fine. That's about all I'm trying to say.


When did I say they did not exist?

I was NEVER trying to argue their existence or even that some of them are used for work...
You sure seemed to be going out of your way to make it sound like white or even mostly white BCs were falling like leaves on a tree...


----------



## Remaru (Mar 16, 2014)

JohnnyBandit said:


> And YOU brought up the AKC.... I never mentioned them... this is about working dogs.....


Yes because you seem confused as to what a "white collie" is. When I say White Collie this is what I mean, not whatever it is you assume I mean. I have not once changed directions. White collies are not at all uncommon either, as no color of collie is preferred by the breed club.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

There was a lot of talk about white dogs not being able to work stock. I was simply pointing out 'hey, these dogs are white and work stock'


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Remaru said:


> Yes because you seem confused as to what a "white collie" is. When I say White Collie this is what I mean, not whatever it is you assume I mean. I have not once changed directions. White collies are not at all uncommon either, as no color of collie is preferred by the breed club.


I was never confused at what a white collie is...


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> There was a lot of talk about white dogs not being able to work stock. I was simply pointing out 'hey, these dogs are white and work stock'


When did I ever say they could not work stock? 

That would just be silly....

I stated why a lot of folks did not like white dogs. Or horses for that matter...


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

If you look on the left under cowdogs. click on the 'the hangin tree cowdog' tag on the left side click on it 3rd picture down under hard working crew two of the dogs are mostly white dogs

I did not mention Samoyeds worked cattle that they herd reindeer that I am sure are a little bit more skittish to work around than cattle.

This is kind of interesting link showing some different breeds of dogs used for herding http://herdingontheweb.com/herding-dogs.html?m


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> When did I ever say they could not work stock?
> 
> That would just be silly....
> 
> I stated why a lot of folks did not like white dogs. Or horses for that matter...


I for one do not like white horse only because they are more prone to melanoma than other color of horses 
but it also a matter if it is a gray horse or a white horse http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gray_(horse)


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

luv mi pets said:


> If you look on the left under cowdogs. click on the 'the hangin tree cowdog' tag on the left side click on it 3rd picture down under hard working crew two of the dogs are mostly white dogs
> 
> I did not mention Samoyeds worked cattle that they herd reindeer that I am sure are a little bit more skittish to work around than cattle.
> 
> This is kind of interesting link showing some different breeds of dogs used for herding http://herdingontheweb.com/herding-dogs.html?m


I saw those.... But look at the dogs he keeps.....


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

luv mi pets said:


> I for one do not like white horse only because they are more prone to melanoma than other color of horses
> but it also a matter if it is a gray horse or a white horse http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gray_(horse)


Add another reason.... I live in Florida...


----------



## Remaru (Mar 16, 2014)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I was never confused at what a white collie is...


Then why turn the discussion to lethal white?


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Remaru said:


> Then why turn the discussion to lethal white?


I simply brought it up.... Twice....


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

JohnnyBandit says: <<You are so intent on being correct.... Giving us thousand word posts to awe us with your knowledge.... That you cannot realize that you are so incorrect no matter how much you twist, you ain't getting back there.... >>

I haven't been on here in a couple of days, so haven't read anything yet past the post of your above quote. So let me be very clear. I joined this conversation early on regarding white in breeds. I understand fully about lethal white, AS I've already stated. But there are DIFFERENT white genes...some connected to very bad health issues, and some that aren't...and I believe I even said that what some people think of as white, because it LOOKS white, isn't truly white. I believe I talked about dog show people using bleach to whiten dogs who were, hmmm..too dull? I believe I talked about boxers who do have the "bad" white, yet show breeders perpetuate the incidence of it because "flashier" boxers (those with the maximum allowable white) win more. In THAT breed, darker is SAFER.

I believe I've also state that MANY herding breeds, because at some point, they probably were inter-bred to produce other herding breeds, that they DO have some "bad" white genes. And I believe that comes from the merle gene...which, while beautiful, has proven dangerous. Now...what I am NOT sure about...is that in SOME herding breeds while they have the merle gene potential IN that breed...many also have the very traditional "irish markings" meaning a white ruff, white feet, white tail tip....pretty standard markings for your average border collie, collie, sheltie, bearded collie, Australian shepherds and others. I would have to research further, but I don't think that the white genes associated with the Irish PATTERN is associated with the white gene for the merle color. But here is where it gets tricky....genotype versus phenotype. There can be collies and shelties and even border collies out there who LOOK like either sable or tri-color, but who are actually merle. It is just that the "merling" component didn't have enough "modifier" genes to actually fully express. So, thinking the dog or bitch is sable or tri-color, and is bred to a merle...obviously a lot of problems will ensue, and the "white in general" is blamed, and not the fact that the breeder unwittingly just did a merle to merle breeding.

The first litter of puppies I ever had was with my first GSD. A friend at work gave me this dog because she was killing his goats. He had a pair of GSD's...the male was clearly black and tan, and she was black and tan, although she did have a lot of grizzle on her back, which is common in the breed, but she sported the DEFINITE saddle pattern of a black and tan shepherd. Sable GSD's don't have a saddle pattern. A month into my owning her...it became clear to me she was pregnant. German Shepherd dogs had always been my life long goal...I had studied this breed, read the definitive book by the father of the breed Von Stephanitz, read Fred Lanting's books...so I had some knowledge going into this, even though I didn't make it happen. Imagine my surprise when, out of seven puppies, I got one sable-colored GSD. 

That was supposed to be impossible, because the typical black and tan pattern of the GSD is a RECESSIVE gene. The sable color is DOMINANT. This is WHY the black and tan is prevalent, because people favored the black and tan saddle pattern, and it was easy to get BECAUSE it is recessive. In order to produce sable, at least one parent has to be sable. Guess my black and tan bitch, while LOOKING like a typical black and tan, was actually sable, because of the modifying genes. This one event in my life, because I am a curious sort, led me to study colors in general with dogs, and I quite frankly find it fascinating. I would actually welcome other people to be as interested and read about this. Of course, you need to pay attention to the source of the information. 

By the way, JohnnyBandit....I realize I can be long-winded, but so are you...the whole tirade on cattle post was a great way to expound your knowledge yet had nothing to do with the subject at hand. In any event....like I have ALWAYS said, I am very well aware of the lethal white gene...but I just happen to think, based on scientific research that all white is not the same white, and when the white is incidental, and not of the lethal sort, it MOSTLY should not be considered in the breeding prospect.


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

<<Well sometime.... Late 1980's or so, I was doing a lot of training for a husband and wife that owned a dog training service. They were farming out some of their problem behavior cases to me.... I have always loved working on a problem behavior. He coined the term after I helped a dog that some thought was beyond help and frankly not safe. Then when he had work for me he would call me up and say.... I need you to go do some of your dog voodoo crappola on this client's dog.. I have always thought it was funny so I keep it around. >>

Thanks for the explanation....you and I actually have some things in common...I too, was the go-to person in "last chance" issues from "other" professionals. Because of my career in the military, I knew a lot of law enforcement people who still had military ties. This was back in the day that law enforcement as still buying "schutzhund" trained GSD's (prior to the realization that great breed was being adulterated by BOTH the show people AND performance people, and they began going with the Malinois) The law enforcement folks, through my military ties, found out my GSD's were doing six hour and beyond successful tracks....and their own GSD's were having trouble completing mere 30 minute tracks. 

My GSD's....um....from that first litter I talked about earlier...simply "farm bred," were also exposed to schutzhund training, and they actually performed extremely well on tracks...they worked QUICKLY because, let's face it...humans don't have the "nose" to know how they DO things. But in SCHUTZHUND??? OMG, lord no, these dogs are not ALLOWED to work naturally....they have to CONSTANTLY keep their nose on the ground, they have to DEMONSTRATE a precise 90 degree turn...they have to jump through a million bells and whistles to track CORRECTLY. This is when I learned about the little "tricks" schutzhund people employ in order to GET THE SCORES for the schutzhund SPORT, rather than allow the dog to think for himself using his own nature-given senses. In schutzhund TRAINING...they starve the dogs so that they will be EAGER to track. They AREN'T allowed to lift their nose to air scent...and if they do, there is NO food for the starved dog, they go back to the beginning until the dog keeps his nose on the ground....in actual competition, it is not unheard of for "friends" of any particular dog to volunteer to be "track layers" and those supposed "random" volunteers soak their boots in liver juice the night before the event. It is all rather distasteful for me.

So when law enforcement came to me over 30 years ago with their schutzhund trained dogs who couldn't follow a "cold track like my naturally trained dogs, I was able to rehabilitate them as well. It is no wonder than law enforcement now shies away from schutzhund trained dogs, because it is no longer a test, but a sport.

But like you as well...."regular" people have come to me wanting answers for their dogs when "obedience" classes failed them. Like I said, seems like we do have important things in common.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

PaddiB said:


> JohnnyBandit says: <<You are so intent on being correct.... Giving us thousand word posts to awe us with your knowledge.... That you cannot realize that you are so incorrect no matter how much you twist, you ain't getting back there.... >>
> 
> I haven't been on here in a couple of days, so haven't read anything yet past the post of your above quote. So let me be very clear. I joined this conversation early on regarding white in breeds. I understand fully about lethal white, AS I've already stated. But there are DIFFERENT white genes...some connected to very bad health issues, and some that aren't...and I believe I even said that what some people think of as white, because it LOOKS white, isn't truly white. I believe I talked about dog show people using bleach to whiten dogs who were, hmmm..too dull? I believe I talked about boxers who do have the "bad" white, yet show breeders perpetuate the incidence of it because "flashier" boxers (those with the maximum allowable white) win more. In THAT breed, darker is SAFER.
> 
> ...


Okay good...


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

Quote Originally Posted by Laurelin "I know several working BC people that have predominately white dogs. Several have color headed whites/extreme piebalds.>>

From Johnny Bandit" <<It happens. I said as much and the working BC organization is not opposed to it. But such a dog is still an anomaly.. If a breeder is regularly producing that... they are running towards a genetic dead end. >>

Laurelin didn't say anything about breeders "regularly producing" such dogs, only that these dogs "happened" and they were put to work and they were successful. I know this as well....I don't know of ANY working breeders who produce color...if their good working white dogs had one of the "bad" white genes that produced deafness or blindness, they would figure that out and not breed from the white dog. Simple as that. The thing is...dogs with the "good" white gene are fully capable of producing darkly colored dogs...and this is why almost all white dogs in some lines still exist.


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

<<Than I guess that might cement the argument that white in a herding/working dog is not desirable for reasons that it spooks the stock then? Because if they don't prefer white in a country called Iceland, then maybe there might be some truth to the "white spooks stock" theory. >>

Really? This does not "cement" anything, and there is no "overall" truth that white dogs spooks stock theory....How many people have to state that they have seen predominately white dogs work stock (whether sheep or cattle)? This doesn't make sense to me. The fact that SOME people have the experience that white dogs provoke a certain response does not make that RESPONSE some sort of all-encompassing TRUTH, when too many other people have seen the exact opposite.


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

From JohnnyBandit: <<As for the white shepherds...... They exist because people wanted white dogs. The white in those breeds as with most whites is recessive. To get a line of all white dogs they had to exlude all colors but white. They isolated the recessive gene for white. What else did they isolate? >>

The typical black and tan in the GSD's is ALSO recessive. Being "recessive" doesn't mean it is BAD. In fact...being recessive can be a good thing in SOME circumstances. I don't LIKE that some people are breed ALL WHITE shepherds, because, being a lover of that particular breed, I happen to think that in some kennels it is not pure, but they have brought in other breeds to ensure "white." That aside, as I have said, and as Avie has said, the female aspect of the GENESIS of this breed was, in fact, WHITE....but...probably not "white/white" but the very light "creme" which is of the same gene family as the Great Pyrennes and Pulik, etc. You don't breed FOR it, but you also don't DENY them when they happen to be born.


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

<<Lethal white is a horse term but sometimes applies to double Merle's in dogs. Not the same as a color headed white or piebald dog. >>

You are very correct, Laurelin, it isn't NECESSARILY the same. A true color-headed white dog that was born with no merle influence should be fine....but a white-headed dog may not PHENOTYPICALLY present as a merle....it could actually be a GENOTPYICAL merle, but not present as such because of those all-important modifier genes...and I think that is why people have misconceptions.


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

Okay...so I've commented on a lot of things during the journey of this thread which grew to many pages since I've been on this list, and I see that in my absence, since I wasn't there to be berated, Laurelin and Remaru have taken the brunt for simply expressing their OWN experiences and research. Look, like I said, I made a career in the military, I'm not one to back down, and I applaud Laurelin and Remaru for sticking in there for being attacked personally when they were simply trying to add to the conversation. Obviously, at least between the three of us, we've seen many people with either white dogs or almost all white dogs working stock....it is simply a fact. And we've seen a person TRY to confuse you, twist your words, etc...and in DOING THAT, make you think YOU have done it...it is all very interesting. Thank you for standing strong and hanging in there.


----------



## CrimsonAccent (Feb 17, 2012)

You do know there is a quote button, right?


----------



## Avie (Jul 10, 2011)

PaddiB said:


> I don't LIKE that some people are breed ALL WHITE shepherds, because, being a lover of that particular breed, I happen to think that in some kennels it is not pure, but they have brought in other breeds to ensure "white." That aside, as I have said, and as Avie has said, the female aspect of the GENESIS of this breed was, in fact, WHITE....but...probably not "white/white" but the very light "creme" which is of the same gene family as the Great Pyrennes and Pulik, etc. You don't breed FOR it, but you also don't DENY them when they happen to be born.


Yeah, there are rumors that Samoyeds were used to fix white coats and long hair in white Swiss shepherds, but that's a load of crap.  Both the genes for long coats and white (very diluted red, it's not actual white. You'll notice when you look closely enough at the coat, or when you put an actual Samoyed next to a white Swiss shepherd, or when you see a white Swiss shepherd in the snow hahah, then suddenly the dog doesn't seem so white anymore) have existed in the GSD breed for a long long time. No other breeds came into play.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

well I guess after reading this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gray_(horse) all stock dogs should be an earthy tan or just not use dogs in order to keep the cattle calm and not stressed. 

My own horses are not more scared of one dog more so by color than another dog. I notice a difference in their behavior once a dog starts doing the stalking towards them they get ansy. In my observations it is more connected to movement than color concerning a horse's reaction to a dog.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

PaddiB said:


> Okay...so I've commented on a lot of things during the journey of this thread which grew to many pages since I've been on this list, and I see that in my absence, since I wasn't there to be berated, Laurelin and Remaru have taken the brunt for simply expressing their OWN experiences and research. Look, like I said, I made a career in the military, I'm not one to back down, and I applaud Laurelin and Remaru for sticking in there for being attacked personally when they were simply trying to add to the conversation. Obviously, at least between the three of us, we've seen many people with either white dogs or almost all white dogs working stock....it is simply a fact. And we've seen a person TRY to confuse you, twist your words, etc...and in DOING THAT, make you think YOU have done it...it is all very interesting. Thank you for standing strong and hanging in there.


Granted I did not read all your posts. But I did copy and paste them into MS Word. 
2150 words...



luv mi pets said:


> well I guess after reading this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gray_(horse) all stock dogs should be an earthy tan or just not use dogs in order to keep the cattle calm and not stressed.
> 
> My own horses are not more scared of one dog more so by color than another dog. I notice a difference in their behavior once a dog starts doing the stalking towards them they get ansy. In my observations it is more connected to movement than color concerning a horse's reaction to a dog.


You went right by the key point in my original post. 
But that is okay.....


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

Let's sum all of this up...it is very clear that white dog outside of JB's personal experience successfully heard cattle. It is very clear white horses can be among cattle just fine due the personal experience of others. While there are certain white genes in certain breeds that are a genetic problem, which have been thoroughly talked about, there are other "white" genes that are perfectly fine. 

I think everybody (outside of JB) can agree with this. Probably no need to be further berated by JB.


----------



## Kayota (Aug 14, 2009)

johnny how do you explain entire herds of white cattle if cattle are spooked by white? lol


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Kayota said:


> johnny how do you explain entire herds of white cattle if cattle are spooked by white? lol


You missed the entire point.....


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Kayota said:


> johnny how do you explain entire herds of white cattle if cattle are spooked by white? lol


I will make it extremely simple..... 
Entire herds of cattle live together 24/7.... They know each other by sight, odor, sound, etc. 

And it works the same way with livestock guardian dogs.....

In a working ranch situation..... The stock do not see the herding dogs daily, or even weekly. The herding dogs will likely be on and specific group of stock a few times a year. 2 or 3 maybe 4 times. 

And the behaviors and instincts that herding dogs use.... ARE predatory behaviors. Whether it is the crouch and hard stare of a BC, the up close pressure and heeling of an ACD.... And everything in between...All predatory behaviors....

Now all hair colors absorb and reflect light differently.... True white contains no melanin, eumelanin, etc And has a reflective quality.... 

So it is a moonlit night... (you only have about 3 days on each side of the full moon to actually work pasture) 

You have a white or mostly white dog.... A dog the stock does not know, is not used to... AND is showing VERY predatory behaviors.... And ALSO lights up like a downtown street sign..... It FREAKS them out....

Same goes for a true white horse. A horse does not normally exhibit predatory behaviors. But a horse working stock... DOES.....


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

It is interesting JB, you like to say "I'm desperate" to prove my points (meaning me)...yet here you are bringing in ENTIRELY different parameters than what was in your earlier posts into this discussion, even though myself and others have already brought these parameters to light. 

I saw that you flinched when someone brought up the white puli...and the other pictures proffered by people successfully working cattle with white dogs. What you still don't quite seem to grasp, because regardless of your assertions, that there are a lot of cattle operations in the north that DON'T work at night...thus, that whole "moon-light" thing simply doesn't apply. Like I said...totally FINE if in YOUR experience in the south where cattle are worked at night, they don't like white dogs....but it is a big world out there, and many other people and areas don't have the same problems you have, thus.....white dogs do just fine. 

You know, because it is a big world out there that different regions have developed very different type breeds for the same purpose. Heck, look at the collie....for probably just a few hundred miles difference, you have the rough collie versus the smooth. You know, just things like that.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

PaddiB said:


> It is interesting JB, you like to say "I'm desperate" to prove my points (meaning me)...yet here you are bringing in ENTIRELY different parameters than what was in your earlier posts into this discussion, even though myself and others have already brought these parameters to light.
> 
> .


LMAO...... Nope.... Those are the SAME as WHAT I said in my first post....
But good try....



> I saw that you flinched when someone brought up the white puli...and the other pictures proffered by people successfully working cattle with white dogs.


Flinched.... that is a GOOD one.... No Flinching here.... 

Keep twisting though......


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

But if they only see herding dogs a few times a year, and the dogs are exhibiting predatory behavior, surely they can be spooked by the dogs regardless of the color?

I mean, I'm not saying it has never happened. But it seems to me it could happen regardless of the color of the dogs. I'm skeptical because there are just so many things about dogs I've heard passed down over the years as fact that really have no basis in fact. Lots of personal preference and urban legend kinda stuff has gone into dog colors IMO.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

sassafras said:


> But if they only see herding dogs a few times a year, and the dogs are exhibiting predatory behavior, surely they can be spooked by the dogs regardless of the color?



this is true when I am talking to people about their herding dog it is about the movement of the dog that gets talked about. We do quite a few international shipping for breeders and it is about the pup' s natural ability they are breeding for not color. A BC recently was shipped to Paraguay to start life on a cattle ranch, Color was not important, it was videos of how the pup was already displaying herding behaviors that were talked about. I have seen some not so pretty looking ranch dogs get rave reviews and it is always about movement. 

Heck it is even documented where wolf packs go pass and nothing. The pack changes how they move and the whatever is all about being leery and moving on, I have seen this with farm, ranch, stock whatever you want to call the dogs. I have seen the dogs hop in the water tanks and the cows come get a drink while the dogs are cooling off. 

My posts were no matter what I found out about cattle and color I was unable to find any link that stated cows were more spooked by white dogs whether it is at night or day. We northerners tend to mess with our cattle during the day hours anyway.. Sometimes early sometimes late but usually in the day hours.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

sassafras said:


> But if they only see herding dogs a few times a year, and the dogs are exhibiting predatory behavior, surely they can be spooked by the dogs regardless of the color?
> 
> I mean, I'm not saying it has never happened. But it seems to me it could happen regardless of the color of the dogs. I'm skeptical because there are just so many things about dogs I've heard passed down over the years as fact that really have no basis in fact. Lots of personal preference and urban legend kinda stuff has gone into dog colors IMO.



I agree.... A lot of things about dogs is stoked in personal opinions, myths, misconceptions, etc.

But this is not something I have heard about and repeated because others, etc. I did hear about it before I have seen it. 
But I have seen it multiple times, with different stock, different dogs and different locations. The cows freak out. Go out in a pasture with a white dog on a moonlit night. You could see Squash at three times the distance as toast.

The horse thing I learned on my own. And it was an expensive lesson. I needed a second cow horse. Not one I could train up myself. But a ready to work horse. My old horse was not aging as well as we hoped. He would get lame on me, have problems. I did not have time to buy a young started horse. Expensive.... But I found a deal on a paint that was a thing of beauty to see work. And he was a third of the price of any other decent horse I had looked at. Grandaddy said don't do it. He said why do you think a horse that works as good as you say he does is so cheap? Because no one will buy him. He was a paint but only had a few small spots on him. Mostly white. I bought him anyway.....He was GREAT in the day and hell at night....


----------



## Remaru (Mar 16, 2014)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I agree.... A lot of things about dogs is stoked in personal opinions, myths, misconceptions, etc.
> 
> But this is not something I have heard about and repeated because others, etc. I did hear about it before I have seen it.
> But I have seen it multiple times, with different stock, different dogs and different locations. The cows freak out. Go out in a pasture with a white dog on a moonlit night. You could see Squash at three times the distance as toast.
> ...


I cannot, nor will I try to, speak for all of TX but we only used paint horses on my boss' ranch. He really loved paint horses, the flashier the better. Every time we went out to look at horses he bought them if they were paint horses. The only exception was the little Arabian mare that belonged to me (and she was super pale Palomino). We never used dogs, my boss doesn't like them.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Noooo Squash is like a ninja, you only see him if he wants you to.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Remaru said:


> I cannot, nor will I try to, speak for all of TX but we only used paint horses on my boss' ranch. He really loved paint horses, the flashier the better. Every time we went out to look at horses he bought them if they were paint horses. The only exception was the little Arabian mare that belonged to me (and she was super pale Palomino). We never used dogs, my boss doesn't like them.


It was only this paint... He was about 95% white....


----------



## Kyllobernese (Feb 5, 2008)

A little off topic but when I was ponying horses at the Racetrack, I had a white pony horse. I could not use him in the spring when there were a lot of young horses on the track as they would spook at him even the ones who had a white or grey mother. Later on it was fine when the young horses were more used to all different colored horses and more settled in what they were supposed to do.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Kyllobernese said:


> A little off topic but when I was ponying horses at the Racetrack, I had a white pony horse. I could not use him in the spring when there were a lot of young horses on the track as they would spook at him even the ones who had a white or grey mother. Later on it was fine when the young horses were more used to all different colored horses and more settled in what they were supposed to do.


I could see that easily.....
People that have not spent a lot of time around both cattle and HORSES, do not seem to get just how quirky they can be....

The bull that almost killed me (put me in ICU) was as gentle as a calf with me. He was halter trained and I showed him in the bull show at the State fair three years in a row. Starting at age 12. I had laid up against him and taken naps when he was on display. Then in an instant, he nearly killed me.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I could see that easily.....
> People that have not spent a lot of time around both cattle and HORSES, do not seem to get just how quirky they can be....
> 
> The bull that almost killed me (put me in ICU) was as gentle as a calf with me. He was halter trained and I showed him in the bull show at the State fair three years in a row. Starting at age 12. I had laid up against him and taken naps when he was on display. Then in an instant, he nearly killed me.



That is what happened to my hubby's father. The farmer next to them were loading cattle on the way to the market. One gave birth and the farmer gave it to them. He was raised down in the cellar (basement) and was bottle fed and all. I guess they kind of waited a little on the long side to bring him up to the barn. He would come to his name and could be led around. One day he grew up and proved to the family how big and powerful this now bull was. While pappa was in the ER, grandaddy was home making steaks and hamburger. 


of course I think some ranchers/ farmers have way too much fun http://time.com/3689565/drone-cow-art/
http://time.com/3689565/drone-cow-art/


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

<<But if they only see herding dogs a few times a year, and the dogs are exhibiting predatory behavior, surely they can be spooked by the dogs regardless of the color? I mean, I'm not saying it has never happened. But it seems to me it could happen regardless of the color of the dogs. I'm skeptical because there are just so many things about dogs I've heard passed down over the years as fact that really have no basis in fact. Lots of personal preference and urban legend kinda stuff has gone into dog colors IMO. >>

Thank you...I've repeatedly said that I don't doubt JB's personal experiences, but that is only one experience in thousands of other experiences where color has made no difference. Personal preference and urban legend regarding color has been the bane purebred dogs...it has reduced gene pools, it leads to other extremes, which ALSO reduce gene pools. Check out the Bernese Mountain Dog breed standard. Look at the history of it's "evolution" of color. Simply white markings on the chest became "typically an inverted cross" We'd have to have a big long discussion regarding the mind of humans...but that ONE simple change in the breed standard of the BMD, has become some sort of holy grail...How many truly HEALTHY and wonderful BMD's have been rejected from the gene pool because they didn't sport "an inverted cross." by the way...Berners are one of the more DEPLORABLE breeds regarding healthy hips and longevity.


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

<<Now all hair colors absorb and reflect light differently.... True white contains no melanin, eumelanin, etc And has a reflective quality.... >>

JB, your favorite line seems to be, "You missed the entire point..... " And yet, it is odd that you have missed all the discussion regarding the genetics of white and you are reducing your argument to the term "true white." Hmmm...exactly what is "true white?" You want to dismiss me and others for long posts regarding the spectrum of white...it is OUT there for people to research for themselves....

<<In a working ranch situation..... The stock do not see the herding dogs daily, or even weekly. The herding dogs will likely be on and specific group of stock a few times a year. 2 or 3 maybe 4 times. >>

This is not true...particularly in many areas of Europe. Many dogs in the catalog of breeds today are of the tending variety...they interact with the herd daily. Many times herds have to be put out and brought back in from pastures on a daily basis...so of course, this requires a very different dog than the exciting picture everybody has in their mind of a "herding" dog. GSD's are of this category. The dog's job is to keep the herd together, keep it either off the roads or when it has to be on a road, all together....it is NOT "exciting" to watch...in fact to most people, it is like watching paint dry, compared to what most Americans have in their mind as a "herding" dog. And this is why "Luv my pets" makes a very critical point...it is not the color, it is the demeanor of the dogs. The "movement" of the dogs as she says. THESE herd animals, in THEIR context, are used to very low intensity....such as what the GSD USED to be. Put a Border collie or ACD on them and THEY would freak out....not because of color, but simply because they don't REQUIRE that kind of intense impetus. If a particular animal decides to not follow the rules...a GSD WILL show them who is in charge...it is called the grip....not allowed in the border collie realm (I don't think), but necessary in other circumstances. 



And the behaviors and instincts that herding dogs use.... ARE predatory behaviors. Whether it is the crouch and hard stare of a BC, the up close pressure and heeling of an ACD.... And everything in between...All predatory behaviors....>>


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

<<A little off topic but when I was ponying horses at the Racetrack, I had a white pony horse. I could not use him in the spring when there were a lot of young horses on the track as they would spook at him even the ones who had a white or grey mother. Later on it was fine when the young horses were more used to all different colored horses and more settled in what they were supposed to do. >>

NOOOOOO...it wasn't the color of your pony. The answer lies in exactly what you said in your third sentence...."later on it was fine...." Don't get me started on thoroughbred race horses...this is such a bad example. I spent 10 years with close friends who owned racehorses....this gave me wonderful access to the "behind the scenes" action at race tracks. Since my friends had total access to one particular racetrack, they could drive in and park wherever they wanted to...even right next to the track itself, which on one day I accompanied them, they chose NOT to do since they saw young horses on the track training. Even parking right next to the track, it was still considerable distance from where the horses were training...but they told me that the "mere presence" of their van could spook the horses. Well...while I thought that was weird...okay. On subsequent trips when the "spring horses" were training....three of us were merely standing together on the OUTSIDE portion of the track watching the horses....and when the youngsters came around the turn and saw the three of us standing up on the fence....one or two of them freaked, which caused a couple more to freak...THEY WEREN'T USED TO PEOPLE ON THE FAR SIDE OF THE TRACK WATCHING THEM. It is an issue of context and habituation....NOT COLOR. 

JB, you then make a very curious connection between what was said about a WHITE pony horse for the race track to this: <<The bull that almost killed me (put me in ICU) was as gentle as a calf with me. He was halter trained and I showed him in the bull show at the State fair three years in a row. Starting at age 12. I had laid up against him and taken naps when he was on display. Then in an instant, he nearly killed me. >>

Sort of makes me wonder if you actually understand bovines. No person I know of would be surprised that you ended up in the ICU because you didn't recognize the nature of a bull. They aren't pets when they reach sexual maturity. It is a nice story about the naps you took on him...hopefully you now know that a BULL CALF turns into an actual BULL and deserves the respect of the animal he really is...and um...just how does your story pertain to the white issue?


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

PaddiB said:


> <<Now all hair colors absorb and reflect light differently.... True white contains no melanin, eumelanin, etc And has a reflective quality.... >>
> 
> JB, your favorite line seems to be, "You missed the entire point..... " And yet, it is odd that you have missed all the discussion regarding the genetics of white and you are reducing your argument to the term "true white." Hmmm...exactly what is "true white?" You want to dismiss me and others for long posts regarding the spectrum of white...it is OUT there for people to research for themselves....
> 
> ...


If you quit missing my point, I will quit saying it.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Kyllobernese said:
> 
> 
> > A little off topic but when I was ponying horses at the Racetrack, I had a white pony horse. I could not use him in the spring when there were a lot of young horses on the track as they would spook at him even the ones who had a white or grey mother. Later on it was fine when the young horses were more used to all different colored horses and more settled in what they were supposed to do.
> ...


Don't need to spend a lot of time with either to know that they can be Extremely dangerous. 

If anything us regular uneducated about farm animals folk might be more carefull than that.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

PaddiB said:


> <<A little off topic but when I was ponying horses at the Racetrack, I had a white pony horse. I could not use him in the spring when there were a lot of young horses on the track as they would spook at him even the ones who had a white or grey mother. Later on it was fine when the young horses were more used to all different colored horses and more settled in what they were supposed to do. >>
> 
> NOOOOOO...it wasn't the color of your pony. The answer lies in exactly what you said in your third sentence...."later on it was fine...." Don't get me started on thoroughbred race horses...this is such a bad example. I spent 10 years with close friends who owned racehorses....this gave me wonderful access to the "behind the scenes" action at race tracks. Since my friends had total access to one particular racetrack, they could drive in and park wherever they wanted to...even right next to the track itself, which on one day I accompanied them, they chose NOT to do since they saw young horses on the track training. Even parking right next to the track, it was still considerable distance from where the horses were training...but they told me that the "mere presence" of their van could spook the horses. Well...while I thought that was weird...okay. On subsequent trips when the "spring horses" were training....three of us were merely standing together on the OUTSIDE portion of the track watching the horses....and when the youngsters came around the turn and saw the three of us standing up on the fence....one or two of them freaked, which caused a couple more to freak...THEY WEREN'T USED TO PEOPLE ON THE FAR SIDE OF THE TRACK WATCHING THEM. It is an issue of context and habituation....NOT COLOR.
> 
> ...


race horses are not really a good example lol, because they are basically crazy. I have had older horses that have been ponied a lot spook at paint or white horses, it's not thsy they are afraid of the white, they are just hyper sensitive to anything new and different or out of the ordinary. These horses will even snort and blow at strange people coming down their shed row. it very much is the color of the animal that affects the horse, horses are like dogs red green colorblind whichmeans they only see in shades of grey and some shade of green and yellow. anything out of the ordinary to a prey animals, especially one that is this high octane will set them off, I have seen race horses get spooked by long blowing grass and the sound that it makes.there is no such thing as habituation when it comes to race horses, they are just too high octane and reactive and on edge I have spooked racehorses simply because I wore a really bright t-shirt. If a herd of cattle saw a mostly white herding dog often enough they would probably habituate to them, the problem is like JB said on most large cattle ranches that just doesn't happen.


----------



## WesS (May 12, 2015)

The original dogs bred for the GSD were hand picked and selected as the best herding dogs. Selected my Max for their impressive Working ability. He did not select any herding dogs. He selected only the best.

One of those dogs was indeed WHITE! Even though Max considered white to be a flaw in herding. That particular dog was so phyiscally able, and had tenacity and drive to work. It was one of the best. But Max always favoured function and utility over looks.

So eventually through human intervention, somewhat misconception that colour was the biggest indicator of utility, white dogs were often bred out. So today it is more rare to see strong white herding dog. Darker colours were favoured.

And again through human intervention and folly. Some 'defenders' of white dogs, (Mostly people who like dogs for their looks), started matching white on white dogs, to reproduce white gsd's. Not taking into consideration the same level of tenacity and drive. This is inevitable, as the dogs became more rare, the breeders bred more and more on what was available, rather than what was utilisation and ability to work. (Wearing a vest on a dog, could circumvent many of these concerns.)

Therefore today many white herding dogs can not do the work. White GSD's certainly cant. Other GSD lines are not really bred specifically for herding today anyways. The focus of work is different. But white GSD's today cant do law enforcement or IPO to a high level these days. Fact is the function of the dogs was thinned out, despite their vastly superior white dog ancestor.

But to conclude, white was never an indicator that the dog could not do work. It was more human assumptions like Johnny is making. And this became a self-fullfilling prophecy. In that white dogs today are more often than not not able to do the work.

And to be clear Max von stephanitz favoured the darker colours as a +... But he would never hesitate to breed a stronger better white dog. The fact is he favoured all rounded utility, and not colour as the major contributing factor.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

okay well the one thing this thread has done for me is to get a lot of reading in. so I found this website. http://www.wkc.org.au/News-Articles/Working-Traits-That-Can-Be-Bred.php

it is sheep but for them it would be better to work with a light dog different animal different view on what color is the best.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

One thing......

In this day and age.... We feel that we should be able to google anything..... And that study after study have been done on everything.... 

That is not the case.... Some things in life.... Are not studied.... They are only important to certain people. And they know what they need to know through first hand experience. 


People can have different opinions.... Different theories..... 

Then someone with first hand knowledge says..... White dogs and white horses will spook cattle and freak them out in the dark....

Folks want to counter with this and that.... Folks might even say that person is full of crap... 

And that is fine.....

But most people's experience with cattle is small property/ small herd situations..... 
Larger herds on larger acreage are NOT like your uncles three cows behind his barn. They do not interact with people often. And when they do it is not pleasant. These cattle can be very wild, can be aggressive... But MOSTLY they are quirky and panicky.... And if one panics, they ALL panic. 

Folks can believe that white dogs and horses will not spook cattle at night all they want.
But is anyone willing to risk the lives of horses, dogs, or more importantly people to support that theory?


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

The thing about first hand knowledge is that it is subject to a lot of biases, logical fallacies, and confusing correlation with causation. Johnny, you reject my personal experience about spay/neuter and (lack of) health consequences with thousands of patients _all the time_, basically in every spay/neuter thread. But now I'm supposed to take your personal experience as gospel and not question the logic of it at all?

I've seen dogs choke to death on kibble. I'm not going to tell people that kibble chokes dogs and no one should feed it based on a handful of experiences. 

Nobody is saying that white dogs will never spook cattle. I'm saying that it doesn't make sense to me as a universal rule. Have white dogs spooked cattle? Sure. I'm sure somewhere, some time, a dark dog has spooked cattle, too. I'm sure a dog with a narrow white blaze has spooked cattle. I'm sure a leaf blowing by has spooked cattle.


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

<<But to conclude, white was never an indicator that the dog could not do work. It was more human assumptions like Johnny is making. And this became a self-fullfilling prophecy. In that white dogs today are more often than not not able to do the work. And to be clear Max von stephanitz favoured the darker colours as a +... But he would never hesitate to breed a stronger better white dog. The fact is he favoured all rounded utility, and not colour as the major contributing factor. >>

Good job Wes...that was a thoughtful post. And I agree with you about people who breed ONLY white shepherds...not a good idea. They "happen" naturally, nobody should MAKE them happen. The reason the typical B&T GSD is what everybody identifies with is simply because it is a recessive color/pattern in that breed. Most people breed two B&T's together, thus you get B&T's. The "natural" white that happens in GSD's in not a "bad" color. But the "bad" white gene...the one or two identified with severe health issues, happens in ALL breeds...it crops up...and if a small sect of people are breeding ONLY white in a breed that isn't SUPPOSED to be all white...then there is NO way for them to know the difference between the good and the bad...the "badder" genes produce a more "white" than the more "cream" natural GSD....these people think they have hit the jackpot because they produced an even WHITER coat...sigh...now they are compromised.

I've known people who have bred to extremely DARK GSD's together... those in the breed call "bi-colors" or almost black sables...sometimes hard to tell the difference which is which....and have produced a NORMAL cream colored pup. Likewise, I have thus seen a cream colored dog/bitch produce RICHLY colored offspring. Because it WASN'T the bad white gene. In any event, good post Wes.


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

<<The thing about first hand knowledge is that it is subject to a lot of biases, logical fallacies, and confusing correlation with causation. Johnny, you reject my personal experience about spay/neuter and (lack of) health consequences with thousands of patients all the time, basically in every spay/neuter thread. But now I'm supposed to take your personal experience as gospel and not question the logic of it at all? I've seen dogs choke to death on kibble. I'm not going to tell people that kibble chokes dogs and no one should feed it based on a handful of experiences. Nobody is saying that white dogs will never spook cattle. I'm saying that it doesn't make sense to me as a universal rule. Have white dogs spooked cattle? Sure. I'm sure somewhere, some time, a dark dog has spooked cattle, too. I'm sure a dog with a narrow white blaze has spooked cattle. I'm sure a leaf blowing by has spooked cattle. >>

Wow...I'll say one thing...JB is right that my posts tend to be too long and labored...I'm sorry for that, because what Sassafras says above in such few words pretty much sums it up, and not just the white issue, but "knowledge" in general.

Thirty, twenty, and even fifteen years ago, I had "opinions" that I thought were "right." Some opinions still bear out, but many others have evolved because simply age and experience has allowed me to see different pictures. Simple knowledge isn't always the truth. The worst thing a human can do is think they know it all...they have become to attached to what they have already learned or experienced and that is the "end." Most successful people in life, a WHOLE life, not just a snippet, recognize that learning never ends. Nobody LIKES to be wrong, but humility is a dying trait. I actually don't mind being wrong, because I can admit that my "view" of things regarding the smaller things in life such as "dog opinions" now is very different than my view of such things as a young adult. And when I say smaller....I mean the minutia such as color, not the big picture.

JB...you've gone from ALL WHITE DOGS SCARE ALL CATTLE, to trying to "not to be wrong" by bringing in parameters. I don't think anybody has questioned your personal experiences...they've only tried to tell you of DIFFERENT experiences. People have tried to tell you in THEIR personal experience, they've seen white dogs work large cattle operations....it is not a matter of 1,000 cattle, 500 cattle, 100 cattle, or three cattle...the fact is, a dog being WHITE is not the problem, and as Sassafras said...who the hell knows WHAT the cattle are actually afraid of at night...cattle are hard-wired to KNOW predators come at night...they could simply be spooky in general at night... as Sassafras says it is "confusing correlation with causation." And it also has to do with habituation.


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

<<okay well the one thing this thread has done for me is to get a lot of reading in. so I found this website. http://www.wkc.org.au/News-Articles/...an-Be-Bred.php

it is sheep but for them it would be better to work with a light dog different animal different view on what color is the best. >>

Luv mi pets, I read the article...and I don't know a lot about Kelpies, but it isn't just color this article talks about, but pigment....and I DO know the difference between pigment in color...It is the difference between DILUTES, which can include the merle genes. I THINK but not even sure at this point....that SOME merles are fine, but the majority of merles have the "bad" white gene, because the "blue" and "red" merles that people want has that "ethereal" look since they have confused genotype with phenotype. 

Dilute genes are NOTHING I want to mess with. Talk to any Doberman person who is truly honest (and I have). They have four acceptable colors...black and rust, red and rust, and the dilute version of each, blue and fawn. Look, I am a curious person...even when I'm not personally involved in any specific breed, I am CURIOUS to know about other breeds. I've NEVER known a doberman person who didn't admit that the two dilute colors present with skin issues...ranging from light to severe. 

Re-read the very article you presented...both light and dark dogs can have bad pigment, and both light and dark dogs can have GOOD pigment. Just like certain "bad" white genes can crop into a breed where "good" white genes also crop up, dilutes also crop up....and it is VERY difficult to know the difference sometimes particularly when people are breeding for a specific COLOR. 

Look at the whippet standard...under color...it is color IMMATERIAL. Yet, when you read the entire standard, it highly faults dogs with either light or broken pigmentation in both the eye rims and nose. One of its disqualifications are blue eyes, or ANY PORTION of the eyes that are blue, and many of us know that merle dogs can have a portion of their eyes BOTH blue and brown. I think it is one of the better standards because whoever wrote it, while they weren't brave enough to outright say it, color and pigment are two different things, yet also intertwined if WE allow it....take care of pigment. Now, if you talk to whippet people, they will talk to you about dilutes and brindle dilutes and other such things, and I'm not sure if there WORDS conform to actual genetics. It is a matter of shades of red, versus light tan, and who knows...perhaps the fact that brindle is so prevalent in the breed, that it protects the breed...who knows....but the fact this breed seriously takes PIGMENT into consideration and NOT color...I think they "get" it. Unlike most of the herding folks which struggle with merles.

Just another cog...


----------



## Avie (Jul 10, 2011)

There is no such thing as "bad white" in white GSDs, or white Swiss shepherds for that matter. It is in essence extremely lightened red. It's not actual white. 

Look at that snowy white coat, lol. 









Their not-exactly-white coat only becomes apparent in actual white surroundings like snow. 

There are no health issues related to the color of white GSDs and white Swiss shepherds.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

PaddiB said:


> JB...you've gone from ALL WHITE DOGS SCARE ALL CATTLE, to trying to "not to be wrong" by bringing in parameters. I don't think anybody has questioned your personal experiences...they've only tried to tell you of DIFFERENT experiences. People have tried to tell you in THEIR personal experience, they've seen white dogs work large cattle operations....it is not a matter of 1,000 cattle, 500 cattle, 100 cattle, or three cattle...the fact is, a dog being WHITE is not the problem, and as Sassafras said...who the hell knows WHAT the cattle are actually afraid of at night...cattle are hard-wired to KNOW predators come at night...they could simply be spooky in general at night... as Sassafras says it is "confusing correlation with causation." And it also has to do with habituation.


That is not what I said..... You desire to be right and prove me wrong causes you to twist further with each post.....
You have turned three or four circles on this thread.

Go back and read my first post on this subject....


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

sassafras said:


> The thing about first hand knowledge is that it is subject to a lot of biases, logical fallacies, and confusing correlation with causation. Johnny, you reject my personal experience about spay/neuter and (lack of) health consequences with thousands of patients _all the time_, basically in every spay/neuter thread. But now I'm supposed to take your personal experience as gospel and not question the logic of it at all?


So that is how it works now? 

You reject my word because you and I do not see eye to eye on Spay and Neuter? Gotcha!!!


The thing is.... I am NOT asking you to take my word....



You get bonus points for bringing Speuter into this....


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

Paddi B I posted that link for this 
Maybe today most kelpies that I come across that have a classic paddock cast - with natural break off are cream or yellow in colour and perhaps it might be the reason why most blue kelpies are subject to skin problems. The old blues used to scratch and itch so much they were known as the hairless breed, but will we ever know for sure, what genes are linked to colour in certain strains? Probably not, I would think.

Over the years I have found colour has got some relevance, e.g. Light dogs with pink or light points can get sun burnt but light dogs with black points don’t and they stand the heat quite well. But more importantly is the reaction of stock to colour.

What Do Sheep See?
Have sheep got colour vision? They tell us not. Or do they just see black and white and shades of grey? I have not looked into this subject fully. No doubt others have, but I do know that sheep, goats, cows and possibly most domesticated stock show little or no fear of other animals that are white or cream in colour. They do however react and show fear towards dark coloured animals. Proving this to some degree is the fact that sheep and goats will accept the white or cream Maremmas as guard dogs. The sheep will let these dogs live in their midst and show no fear of them at all. It is also noticeable in a Three Sheep Trial; if a white dog is competing the sheep seem far more relaxed, but often these light coloured dogs get into trouble on the bridge or pressure points because the sheep often refuse to move for them.

Black and dark tan dogs or straight blacks often have the other effect. Sheep tend to move off quickly from them, but the inner strength in a dog still has the biggest influence as to whether sheep move off a dog or not.

The late Frank Scanlon was noted for his dark blue kelpies. Creams, fawns and blue kelpies were far more common in yesteryear than they are today. These coloured kelpies would have been ideally suited to sheep, in bush runs, that were possibly only mustered once or twice a year. Sheep not handled often would not spook so readily from a lighter coloured dog. I am sure in today’s more intent farming that the darker coloured kelpies are more practical.

It stated that sheep had less fear of lighter color animals than the darker ones. I was not posting for color genes. 

I have had Dobermans for many years. I will not own a White, blue, or fawn. I will only own the reds or blacks. I have seen way too many health problems with the other colors. Others can have them but I just will not.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

JohnnyBandit said:


> So that is how it works now?
> 
> You reject my word because you and I do not see eye to eye on Spay and Neuter? Gotcha!!!


Oh for crying out loud Johnny. That's not what I meant and you know it. 

Either personal experience is a valid source of information, or it's not. You don't get to use your personal experience as fact and ignore other people's personal experience in other discussions as not-fact. 

And I don't "reject" your word - as I explicitly stated, I'm sure cows can spook from a white dog and I don't doubt you've seen it. It just doesn't objectively make sense to me that's an across the board, inherently true thing.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

sassafras said:


> Oh for crying out loud Johnny. That's not what I meant and you know it.
> 
> Either personal experience is a valid source of information, or it's not. You don't get to use your personal experience as fact and ignore other people's personal experience in other discussions as not-fact.
> 
> And I don't "reject" your word - as I explicitly stated, I'm sure cows can spook from a white dog and I don't doubt you've seen it. It just doesn't objectively make sense to me that's an across the board, inherently true thing.


LOL Relax.... I thought you would enjoy that... Which is why I said it.... Gotta admit it was pretty good


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

luv mi pets said:


> Paddi B I posted that link for this
> Maybe today most kelpies that I come across that have a classic paddock cast - with natural break off are cream or yellow in colour and perhaps it might be the reason why most blue kelpies are subject to skin problems. The old blues used to scratch and itch so much they were known as the hairless breed, but will we ever know for sure, what genes are linked to colour in certain strains? Probably not, I would think.
> 
> Over the years I have found colour has got some relevance, e.g. Light dogs with pink or light points can get sun burnt but light dogs with black points don’t and they stand the heat quite well. But more importantly is the reaction of stock to colour.
> ...



Luv....

You posted.... Therefore..... You are either....

A) Wrong.... Which means paddi will make a 1351 word post that no one can follow because it is all over the place... And at the end she will tell you that you are wrong....

Or 

B) Paddi decides you are correct.... Which means she will make a 1537 word post completely reversing what you say, but tell she will tell you that you were correct. Even though what she says is completely the opposite of what she says.....


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Luv....You posted.... Therefore..... You are either....
> 
> A) Wrong.... Which means paddi will make a 1351 word post that no one can follow because it is all over the place... And at the end she will tell you that you are wrong....
> 
> ...


Hey Johnny...I truly find it interesting that you are scrambling to control EVERYBODY here...oops, Sassafras made a point, and you just say...ahh. just kidding. Whatever. I'll TRY to keep this under 1500 words. Luv isn't necessarily right OR wrong. She/he simply has preconceived notions and doesn't see the larger picture. Genotype versus phenotype...why in so many breeds many colors were sported, yet they became split. For example...in the Belgian breeds....they used to be one breed...now they are four. The whole thing is ludicrous regarding what either cattle or sheep "see." Who is right when the black belgians performed just fine in their small area, and others had success with the sabling color of the tervuren and malinois...or the very different coat type of the Laekenois (as yet not recognized by the almighty AKC). Who is right? The answer is, nobody is RIGHT. They are simply different, and different people succeed with all of them. 

If ON THE WHOLE, white, black, brown or whatever combination of any had some sort of "sway" over how cattle or sheep reacts....we would have a "herding group" in every country or kennel club of very specific colors, but we don't. They come in all colors, all coat types. The problem is...humans have a tendency to DENY health issues in lieu of personal vanity. Thus.....welcome the world of urban legend, outright condemnation of medical science because Lord knows humans think they know more than nature....and today we are faced with stupid arguments. It is all hubris.


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

Avie said:


> There is no such thing as "bad white" in white GSDs, or white Swiss shepherds for that matter. It is in essence extremely lightened red. It's not actual white.
> 
> Their not-exactly-white coat only becomes apparent in actual white surroundings like snow.
> 
> There are no health issues related to the color of white GSDs and white Swiss shepherds.


Look, I hope I am getting the hang of correct "quoting" here...If I am wrong, I'll appreciate some help. That being said....

Avie...I simply have to disagree with you. There ARE both good and bad whites in the GSD. I do not think you are right that the white in GSD's is merely an extremely lightened red, although I recognize that you truly believe this due to the emergence of this new breed "White Swiss Shepherd." The pictures you presented of the white shepherd, especially the one at the end is NOT the truth....it is back-lit by sunlight and it is red. I've seen actual natural white shepherds where the color wouldn't be pink, but black/grey. Dark pigment...The dog in your photo, seems to have a pale nose....not good..

Look...here is the problem, and it may be uncomfortable to talk about. This breed was founded by a German....Max Von Stephanitz late in the 19th century from two dogs...the male the typical BT and the female cream (white). The breed obviously enjoyed huge success thereafter. Wasn't a big issue during WWI, but this breed DID become quite recognizable during WWII. Horrifying as it is, there is quite a lot of video of Hitler coveting this breed, and his personal dogs were GSD's. Now...this breed COULD have died right there, because NO country wanted to be associated with Hitler. YET....people, meaning the allies of WWII saw the awesome value of this breed. Great Britain sought out this breed...but they couldn't (understand completely) call this breed the "GERMAN Shepherd dog." So they called it the Alsatian. Took me many years in my youth to figure THAT one out. Americans didn't really have that problem...since they were complicit in protecting many Nazi's...but that is a whole other issue. 

So all of that history aside...one man's vision (meaning Max) of a truly great dog turned into not simply a great HERDING dog, but he produced a breed that had the intelligence, power, and discernment that enabled this breed to be THE epitome of seeing eye dogs, of police and military dogs, dogs of superb tracking ability...dogs that could be left alone with children and parents knowing they would be safe....this WAS the ultimate breed. Throughout this early time, sometimes white dogs cropped up...and in those early times, this wasn't an issue....except for the EMERGENCE of the almighty DOG SHOWS. Heck...look at Rin Tin Tin in the early years of his on-screen presence...Didn't have the famous black is better thing....today he would be excused from the ring. Not because he wasn't CORRECT, but because PEOPLE decided he wasn't of the correct "ilk"

German Shepherds are NOT a white breed....except that sometimes white dogs show up through natural means going back to the MOTHER of this breed. The people who NOW only breed white shepherds knew this, but unfortunately in their ZEAL to defend these white dogs now ONLY breed white dogs, and as I said before...when you go down this road, when ALL breeds are prone to "bad" white genes, there is no way to know the difference. Again...this is a revered breed, but there is a "history" in Europe against giving credit to Germany...the "White Swiss Shepherd" is nothing more than a concocted, and ill-conceived, GSD who is all white and apparently is clinging to a diluted "red" gene??? 

EVERBODY wants to re-define the GSD, nobody wants to actually tell the truth....anybody hear about the "Shiloh Shepherd?" Long coats also naturally happen in this breed...many great military/police/seeing-eye dogs sport the long coat...my own best shepherd had the long coat...but she was small....but NOT out of standard...just the low end of the standard. The "Shiloh Shepherd" people were upset that overly large and long-coated GSD's weren't getting the respect THEY (humans) thought they should...so THEY tried to basically to breed outside the standard for their own personal glory to produce a "new" breed. 

It is ALL a fallacy...it is trusting the "wizard behind the curtain" and when the curtain it pulled back, you realize it is just an empty little man (or woman) drunk on power. It is NOT about right or wrong. I'm left to wonder....who actually cares about the DOGS????


----------



## BigLittle (May 28, 2014)

I think Mike (the white shepherd) just has a dudley nose, it can show up even in dogs with black muzzles.

Is there any literature saying the Intensity locus causes any health problems? Because I haven't. And recessive red isn't tied to anything harmful at all.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

> The "Shiloh Shepherd" people were upset that overly large and long-coated GSD's weren't getting the respect THEY (humans) thought they should...so THEY tried to basically to breed outside the standard for their own personal glory to produce a "new" breed.


Hmm. I wouldn't have thought you were all about breeding "to standard". Do you think nobody should ever start a new breed? What would be a good reason for starting a new breed, in your opinion (since you think the Shiloh people were only doing it for their own glory)?

I do think the welfare of the individual dogs should be the first concern of any breeder (none of this nonsense of doing harmful things to individual dogs "for the sake of the breed"), but I also think there are ethical ways to create a new breed.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

PaddiB said:


> Hey Johnny...I truly find it interesting that you are scrambling to control EVERYBODY here...oops, Sassafras made a point, and you just say...ahh. just kidding. Whatever. I'll TRY to keep this under 1500 words. Luv isn't necessarily right OR wrong. She/he simply has preconceived notions and doesn't see the larger picture. Genotype versus phenotype...why in so many breeds many colors were sported, yet they became split. For example...in the Belgian breeds....they used to be one breed...now they are four. The whole thing is ludicrous regarding what either cattle or sheep "see." Who is right when the black belgians performed just fine in their small area, and others had success with the sabling color of the tervuren and malinois...or the very different coat type of the Laekenois (as yet not recognized by the almighty AKC). Who is right? The answer is, nobody is RIGHT. They are simply different, and different people succeed with all of them.
> 
> If ON THE WHOLE, white, black, brown or whatever combination of any had some sort of "sway" over how cattle or sheep reacts....we would have a "herding group" in every country or kennel club of very specific colors, but we don't. They come in all colors, all coat types. The problem is...humans have a tendency to DENY health issues in lieu of personal vanity. Thus.....welcome the world of urban legend, outright condemnation of medical science because Lord knows humans think they know more than nature....and today we are faced with stupid arguments. It is all hubris.


You kept it under three hundred words. 

And Sass and I have been throwing friendly jabs at each other for years... You are lost in what I am even saying to her....

Besides Sass have a Ninja dog....


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

PaddiB said:


> Look, I hope I am getting the hang of correct "quoting" here...If I am wrong, I'll appreciate some help. That being said....
> 
> Avie...I simply have to disagree with you. There ARE both good and bad whites in the GSD. I do not think you are right that the white in GSD's is merely an extremely lightened red, although I recognize that you truly believe this due to the emergence of this new breed "White Swiss Shepherd." The pictures you presented of the white shepherd, especially the one at the end is NOT the truth....it is back-lit by sunlight and it is red. I've seen actual natural white shepherds where the color wouldn't be pink, but black/grey. Dark pigment...The dog in your photo, seems to have a pale nose....not good..
> 
> ...



That is more like it. 696 words....


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

> do not think you are right that the white in GSD's is merely an extremely lightened red, although I recognize that you truly believe this due to the emergence of this new breed "White Swiss Shepherd." The pictures you presented of the white shepherd, especially the one at the end is NOT the truth....it is back-lit by sunlight and it is red. I've seen actual natural white shepherds where the color wouldn't be pink, but black/grey. Dark pigment...The dog in your photo, seems to have a pale nose....not good..


It doesn't matter if you think she's right. She's right, you're wrong. White GSDs are the same color as yellow labradors, genetically speaking. They are ee red.

http://doggenetics.co.uk/masks.html

http://doggenetics.co.uk/albino.html


----------



## Avie (Jul 10, 2011)

Xeph said:


> It doesn't matter if you think she's right. She's right, you're wrong. White GSDs are the same color as yellow labradors, genetically speaking. They are ee red.
> 
> http://doggenetics.co.uk/masks.html
> 
> http://doggenetics.co.uk/albino.html


Thanks Xeph. And I love that site.  

Also yes, Mike has a dudley nose. Other than that his pigment is just fine.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

I want to throw it out there that the "white" Labs people see (even ones found in "bench" lines) are....yellow. They are still yellow. Just incredibly light.


----------



## Paviche (Aug 26, 2011)

Same with the "white" or "English cream" Goldens.


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

Xeph said:


> It doesn't matter if you think she's right. She's right, you're wrong. White GSDs are the same color as yellow labradors, genetically speaking. They are ee red.


Mea Culpa regarding the "ee" gene, however, it is much more complicated than simply saying "ee" versus anything else. There are countless alleles which affect both color, pigment, and health issues for which some are attached to health issues. There are actually a lot of breeds which "sport" the "ee" gene, and interestingly enough, it is quite varied, due to the different breeds having different alleles and loci...etc etc. 

So here lies the problem...which I said from the beginning...the "ee" (what some call white) HAPPENS in this breed, because the female genesis of this breed WAS white. Thus, that expression of the "ee" was capable of happening. However, the classic B&T is ALSO recessive, but was favored for whatever reason. The agouti gene was also prevalent, which is dominant which became known as "sable." So one of the "problems" with defining "colors" by humans is that the word "sable" in the GSD world is VERY different than the word "sable" in other breeds. A "sable" colored collie" is very different than a "sable" colored GSD. VERY different genes. Even today, when I try to "traverse" all of the different breeds regarding the "names" of colors.....what is "called" one color in one breed, is very different, genetically, than the SAME named color for a different breed. It is no wonder confusion prevails.

HUMANS "declared" that the occasional "white" GSD was an abomination. It wasn't a "fact." You have to remember the time period that the GSD was "borne" and it was somewhat during this time of the "Victorian Era" where "dog shows" became a "thing." But look at history...his first dog, Horand was in 1899...WWI began in 1914, and regardless of whatever happened regarding his founding of the SV...WAR and the years in the aftermath of the war did NOT endear this breed to the masses. I'd love to continue to talk about history, but it seems my words are being counted. 

Suffice it to say, during all the turmoil of both WWI and WWII this absolutely wonderful breed, regardless of color, came under the delusions of humans...it COULD have died out due to the fact it was conceived by Germans...but luckily the Allies, which included the US, admired the breed. It became THE dog for guiding the blind, it became THE dog for the military and the police, it was THE preeminent family dog to protect children. The Victorian driven "dog shows" which prevail to this day, have destroyed this once magnificent breed. Again, you don't have to believe what I say...just see for your own eyes what breed is the next to be destroyed.

So...white? It is something that used to "happen" but today there are people BREEDING for simply a COLOR, perhaps out of frustration...but the result is the same...whether you breed for severe angulation or a color to "weirdly" counteract all the "ills" in this breed...you are compounding a "color" that in of itself, when CONSTANTLY bred together (which was never the goal) WILL also produce issues.

People love the fact that today we have "google" and whatever search engines, so they go there "get the truth" and yet, mostly when I am trying to get actual information, google gives me websites of people with personal agendas...not the truth...this is why I won't automatically agree with websites that are CLEARLY self-serving for THEIR views....frustration works both ways...


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

You know what I took away from all of that?

You are way too attached to "quotation marks." Seriously.

This is what I keep picturing:


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Doggie genetics: Pushing the agenda of... understanding the genetics of coat colors in dogs.


----------



## Avie (Jul 10, 2011)

You guys make me laugh.  

Anyway, PaddiB, we're just going to have to disagree. I'll just finish with saying that breeding for color doesn't produce issues. Unless you're breeding, like, merle to merle... but I hope we can actually agree that breeding white to white shepherds is NOT of the same category, right? Right? 

Right. Breeding ee red dogs together does not cause health issues. 

Breeding for color doesn't cause issues; when you inbreed is when you cause issues. (which is what you were maybe implying with "when CONSTANTLY bred together"...?) But that's a whole 'nother matter.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Xeph said:


> It doesn't matter if you think she's right. She's right, you're wrong. White GSDs are the same color as yellow labradors, genetically speaking. They are ee red.
> 
> http://doggenetics.co.uk/masks.html
> 
> http://doggenetics.co.uk/albino.html


You know what I got? 
Her posts are getting shorter..... Only 561 words. 

Sore fingers?


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

Willowy said:


> Hmm. I wouldn't have thought you were all about breeding "to standard". Do you think nobody should ever start a new breed? What would be a good reason for starting a new breed, in your opinion (since you think the Shiloh people were only doing it for their own glory)?
> 
> I do think the welfare of the individual dogs should be the first concern of any breeder (none of this nonsense of doing harmful things to individual dogs "for the sake of the breed"), but I also think there are ethical ways to create a new breed.


Wow...I'll start with your first sentence...I truly did used to believe in "breed standards" and I clung to that for a long time, and then age and experience made me question actual truth versus the mindless regurgitation of people who wanted to defy nature in lieu of ribbons.

You ask should nobody start a new breed? My answer is yes. I'm thinking you were banking on me saying "no." Maybe you were trying to catch me in an English trap. So then you ask what would be a good reason to start a new breed, and you specifically are asking my opinion, I am telling you there IS no good reason to start a new breed today. The breeds we have today, save for a few, were bred for actual purposes...and quite frankly, there are a LOT of breeds we have today that were bred for purposes 100-200 years ago that shouldn't even exist, but they do...and ETHICAL breeders have tempered certain behavioral qualities in order to preserve these breeds. In other words...bull-baiting breeds shouldn't exist now, most of the working breed shouldn't exist now...the different terriers in existence today have no "job." Why do we continue to breed otter hounds? Otters are a protected species. People continue to breed these ESTABLISHED breeds, albeit with some modified behaviors in order to make them family pets, to PRESERVE history. Just ONE other example.

You ask what would be a good reason TODAY to start a new breed? I say NO GOOD REASON. We simply don't live in a time where the "dog" actually helps people to survive. Because of this...we have people who simply have time on their hands to come up with the "puggle" and "poo" this or that....name your poison concerning all the breeds the poodle or cocker has been crossed with, all for the sake of HUMAN ego. Oh...and before you bring up the MYRIAD of breeding gymnastics for fly-ball competition...and it PAINS me that people are actually trying to breed something as innocuous as a "fly-ball" dog...WHAT IS THE POINT? 

You bring up the fact I brought up the Shiloh Shepherd folks....and you seem to have a problem that I think someone "developed" this breed for their personal glory...well..READ THIS:

10) PROPORTION: The Shiloh Shepherd™ should appear longer than tall. The desired height for males, at the top the highest point of the shoulder blade, can be no less than 28" with the ideal height of 30" or more preferred. For females, the desired height can be no less than 26" with the ideal height of 28"or more preferred. The minimum weight for dogs should not be less than 120 pounds at maturity (three years), with the ideal being 140 to 160 pounds. Minimal weight for bitches is 80 pounds at maturity and the ideal being 100 to 120 pounds. 

Seriously? It is ridiculous...it is failure...it can't be done long-term, but you'll never know this because "google" doesn't say so. Even established breeds at that size have issues, and we want to hitch our wagon to EVERYTHING a true GSD ISN'T??? So, um, YES, I've been involved long enough to KNOW even more than 20 years ago, the "shiloh shepherd MAY have been talked about with good intentions....but NOW I see they are trying to turn the GSD into a giant breed....WHO WANTS THAT?? And you want to QUESTION me regarding the motives about "new" breeds"? 

Dogs are dogs. tragically, one human idiom DOES prevail here...you can't see the forest for the trees. The perfect dog already exists, in spite of humans.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Dogs help a lot of people survive. SAR dogs, therapy dogs, service dogs. That puggle or poo might be the only thing getting a depressed person out of bed in the morning.

Just because those aren't physical tasks like hunting or war, it doesn't mean dogs aren't still helping us survive.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

sassafras said:


> Dogs help a lot of people survive. SAR dogs, therapy dogs, service dogs. That puggle or poo might be the only thing getting a depressed person out of bed in the morning.
> 
> Just because those aren't physical tasks like hunting or war, it doesn't mean dogs aren't still helping us survive.


I have been there.... Divorce, a job change I did not like..... the only thing getting me up in the morning was the damn dog wanted out.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

> I am telling you there IS no good reason to start a new breed today


As someone looking for a service dog that has been unable to find a suitable candidate due to size and health issues, I'd vehemently disagree with you.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Who cares if the job a breed was originally designed for no longer exists? If the breed can be exercised and entertained in other ways, and is generally healthy, what's the harm in continuing to breed it? As for new breeds, if they're being created responsibly, are healthy, and aren't ending up in shelters, I'm all for that, too.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Crantastic said:


> Who cares if the job a breed was originally designed for no longer exists? If the breed can be exercised and entertained in other ways, and is generally healthy, what's the harm in continuing to breed it? As for new breeds, if they're being created responsibly, are healthy, and aren't ending up in shelters, I'm all for that, too.


I sense a 1098 word response coming....


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Why does it matter if new breeds are created? Who gets to decide what is a legit reason to breed a dog? When was the line in time when it suddenly became bad to create a new breed? 

Also, the flyball people aren't trying to create breeds at all. They are breeding mixed breeds. I'd honestly love one someday.


----------



## Effisia (Jun 20, 2013)

Ha. As someone who is absolutely in love with a very recent breed that was bred for companionship... well, I definitely have to disagree! Eurasiers as the absolute perfect fit for me (thanks Kuma'sMom!) and no other breeds have come close to ticking off every one of my boxes. So yeah, you won't find me arguing about new breeds!


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

Sulimov dog new breed, old job but with todays nut cases greater demand. 

can we say mouse trap. glad it always improving and I no longer have to rely on the cat


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

Effisia said:


> Ha. As someone who is absolutely in love with a very recent breed that was bred for companionship... well, I definitely have to disagree! Eurasiers as the absolute perfect fit for me (thanks Kuma'sMom!) and no other breeds have come close to ticking off every one of my boxes. So yeah, you won't find me arguing about new breeds!


My pleasure! I'm just glad to know someone who has one, so I can live vicariously through you, LOL


----------



## SirviRavenWind (Dec 1, 2014)

PaddiB said:


> You ask what would be a good reason TODAY to start a new breed? I say NO GOOD REASON. We simply don't live in a time where the "dog" actually helps people to survive. Because of this...we have people who simply have time on their hands to come up with the "puggle" and "poo" this or that....name your poison concerning all the breeds the poodle or cocker has been crossed with, all for the sake of HUMAN ego. Oh...and before you bring up the MYRIAD of breeding gymnastics for fly-ball competition...and it PAINS me that people are actually trying to breed something as innocuous as a "fly-ball" dog...WHAT IS THE POINT?


I find this really shallow way of thinking about what deserves to be a breed/ be bred. If we were to follow such a thing we would have very few types (not really breeds) of dogs. Why would we want to go backward? I would think that would kill the diversity of the dogs we have now.


> The perfect dog already exists, in spite of humans.


 - I really find this funny since perfection in and of it's self is relative to the persons view, therefore there can never be a 100% perfect dog


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

I want to be pointed toward this "perfect dog" LOL. 

It's a shame some people think that new breeds shouldn't be created, especially "companion" breeds. I rather like dogs. For companionship. I think most people who get dogs want them for companionship and don't necessarily want to deal with a dog having a strong need to perform some kind of work. Especially since a lot of the work dogs used to do just doesn't exist anymore. So, yeah, as long as the breeder makes sure all the "in-between" dogs get good homes, I don't have any kind of problem with people creating a new breed. All breeds are man-made and I hardly think that people who lived a few hundred years ago should be setting the standards for the dogs that exist now.


----------



## CrimsonAccent (Feb 17, 2012)

My replies in bold.



PaddiB said:


> Wow...I'll start with your first sentence...I truly did used to believe in "breed standards" and I clung to that for a long time, and then age and experience made me question actual truth versus the mindless regurgitation of people who wanted to defy nature in lieu of ribbons.
> 
> *So breed standards are a lie? By changing nature we are ruining it? Every breeder is doing it for human constructs of norms to win a ribbon? Huh. Guess all the responsible breeders that frequent this forum are freaks. And the breeders members here have gotten dogs from.*
> 
> ...


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

PaddiB said:


> Why do we continue to breed otter hounds? Otters are a protected species. People continue to breed these ESTABLISHED breeds, albeit with some modified behaviors in order to make them family pets, to PRESERVE history.



Ummmm Otters can be and are hunted in many places.... They are legal to hunt in my state and many others. 

I did not bother looking at Europe. But they are still hunted with dogs in Ireland. 

You form opinions without any real knowledge of the subjects in which you are commenting.


----------



## ChaosIsAWeim (Feb 12, 2011)

> Already been said by others, but: service dogs literally keep people alive. Or at least improve quality of life, but obviously you are too utilitarian (in the negative sense) to care about that according to your argument.


One example can be seen here

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3125329/This-having-Asperger-s-like-Woman-bravely-shares-video-loyal-dog-stopping-harming-violent-meltdown.html

*Warning: Vid is heartbreaking*.


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

And what about Emotional Assistance Dogs? Kuma may not be the difference between life and death for me, but he IS the difference between my ability to live independently or not, thanks to my anxiety. Try to tell me that's not an important job!


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

Laurelin said:


> Why does it matter if new breeds are created? Who gets to decide what is a legit reason to breed a dog? When was the line in time when it suddenly became bad to create a new breed?
> 
> Also, the flyball people aren't trying to create breeds at all. They are breeding mixed breeds. I'd honestly love one someday.


Alright....so I've read this, and all the posts after this....including posts which have quotes within quotes, and I am not computer savvy, and I get spanked for my way of quoting...well, threatened actually, probably for being banned because I don't know what buttons to push. So even though a lot was said after the above quote (which I hope I quoted correctly), I realized that the above sort of says it all.

Gosh darn it...those flyball follks aren't trying to "create" a new breed...they are happily BREEDING mixed breed dogs!!! What...no goal? No real "thought" that someone might create a breed called the "Flyball" breed? If that is the case...why are these people ANY better than your average irresponsible pet owner who doesn't alter their dogs and let them roam? Why are they ANY better than someone who reads that poodles crossed with ANYTHING that have cute names and can make money. They don't care about health issues or genetics...they don't care that the poodle is rife with a plethora of health issues, bred to another breed with a plethora of different health issues...and now all of those crosses have BOTH the genetic health issues of BOTH breeds. 

Oh wait...poodles aren't involved....flyball dogs are mostly border collie types bred to terrier types, right? Gotta maintain that frenzy, but they have to be small, because competitive flyball dogs have to be small to get the smaller jumps....thus faster times...I've heard of "breeds" within flyball...they call them "Border Jacks." Border collies and Jack Russells. I feel sorry for the average family that gets the "rejects" from such breedings. Both ethical border collie breeders and Jack breeders know most families may not be up to the unique combination of energy and intelligence of EITHER breed...the flyball people don't care about that...they place them in homes and then "say" they are responsible because the "found" homes...maybe it works sometimes, maybe it doesn't, because they don't care....it is all about flyball. 

I guess I wonder why you say you'd like to "have" one someday....have what? A mixed breed dog with a LOT of energy? Go to a shelter...there are a LOT of them there. So yes, I believe the flyball people are trying to develop a new breed, and it is an insane reason with a big footprint in the WTF category.


----------



## missc89 (Jan 20, 2015)

It definitely reads as though you seem to be trying to envelope an entire group of people (dog people) in to a sub group of irresponsible people. Almost like judging a group of people based on the actions of a few. If that is how you argue, it is a fallacy.


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

> So then you ask what would be a good reason to start a new breed, and you specifically are asking my opinion, I am telling you there IS no good reason to start a new breed today. The breeds we have today, save for a few, were bred for actual purposes...and quite frankly, there are a LOT of breeds we have today that were bred for purposes 100-200 years ago that shouldn't even exist, but they do...and ETHICAL breeders have tempered certain behavioral qualities in order to preserve these breeds. In other words...bull-baiting breeds shouldn't exist now, most of the working breed shouldn't exist now...the different terriers in existence today have no "job." Why do we continue to breed otter hounds? Otters are a protected species. People continue to breed these ESTABLISHED breeds, albeit with some modified behaviors in order to make them family pets, to PRESERVE history. Just ONE other example.


IOW, Dog breeds were created for specific jobs, but many of those jobs don't exist anymore. We must keep the same breeds, but breed out the characteristics that enabled them to do their jobs so they can be pets. We must not create new breeds to be family pets. Because history? Makes no sense to me at all.

As the world changes, there's no reason dog breeds shouldn't change to meet new and different needs. Companionship is a legitimate purpose for a dog.



> Gosh darn it...those flyball follks aren't trying to "create" a new breed...they are happily BREEDING mixed breed dogs!!! What...no goal? No real "thought" that someone might create a breed called the "Flyball" breed? If that is the case...why are these people ANY better than your average irresponsible pet owner who doesn't alter their dogs and let them roam? Why are they ANY better than someone who reads that poodles crossed with ANYTHING that have cute names and can make money. They don't care about health issues or genetics...they don't care that the poodle is rife with a plethora of health issues, bred to another breed with a plethora of different health issues...and now all of those crosses have BOTH the genetic health issues of BOTH breeds.


So you've spoken with the flyball folks and have a complete understanding of their breeding programs? All the flyball folks? I suspect they put far more thought into the dogs they are breeding than some purebred breeders. 



> What...no goal?


Um, wouldn't the goal be to breed dogs that especially suited to the sport of flyball? Not much different from breeding dogs especially suited to herding or hunting.


----------



## BigLittle (May 28, 2014)

> I guess I wonder why you say you'd like to "have" one someday....have what? A mixed breed dog with a LOT of energy? Go to a shelter...there are a LOT of them there.


Ah, the good ol' shelter argument.



> Gosh darn it...those flyball follks aren't trying to "create" a new breed...they are happily BREEDING mixed breed dogs!!! What...no goal? No real "thought" that someone might create a breed called the "Flyball" breed? If that is the case...why are these people ANY better than your average irresponsible pet owner who doesn't alter their dogs and let them roam? Why are they ANY better than someone who reads that poodles crossed with ANYTHING that have cute names and can make money.


That's all fine and dandy, but unlike random-bred street dogs, flyball people maybe have a purpose...maybe? (Hint, it's flyball)

Also, doodles do have a purpose. Most of the breeders are terrible, but the correct ones are trying to get the best of both worlds in the cross and hopefully produce low-shedding dogs. I know a family where the father has severe dog allergies and their son needed a service dog. They found a purebred poodle from a local breeder for the job, but they weren't ruling out a well bred doodle during their search. Had doodles not existed, their already frustrating search would have been nearly impossible.



> Border collies and Jack Russells. I feel sorry for the average family that gets the "rejects" from such breedings. Both ethical border collie breeders and Jack breeders know most families may not be up to the unique combination of energy and intelligence of EITHER breed...the flyball people don't care about that...they place them in homes and then "say" they are responsible because the "found" homes...maybe it works sometimes, maybe it doesn't, because they don't care....it is all about flyball.


Evidence please? A good breeder will try to make sure families are up to par for their breed, rejects and all. If a home goes sour after being vetted, maybe it's the fault of, I don't know, the people who absolutely had to have a high-intensity dog? How are they any different from game-bred APBTs or working line BelMals?

Even if in your experience, flyball breeders are irresponsible, it doesn't make the breed useless. As far as the dogs are concerned, they're still propogating the species quite well.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

So just curious is it ok to breed Alaskan huskies for sled races? Also mixes. Also for sport. Ok because the sport is older than flyball?

I also don't have an issue with doodles if bred well. But you are not very informed about flyball mixes. Most I have seen have good lines especially the border whippets. They typically are performance whippet x performance BC lines. The terrier mixes too especially the border staffs. Not all breeders are what I'd call 'good' (subjective) but I have not seen a litter without health testing. Sport people are all about health testing. 

Why would I want one? Because I like them and enjoy them? I'm a big fan of herder x terriers and yes I have the shelter version right now. But I like that sport mixes are bred for structure and with known pedigrees and health testing. It's not the same as getting a maybe border collie mix from a shelter. Why is this type of breeding worse than any other type of dog breeding for a sport? And why is breeding for a sport a bad thing at all? People I know with sport mixes are very happy with their dogs. They are hardy and athletic dogs.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Also just a note these mixes aren't just a flyball thing. There's always a handful of sport mixes at usdaa agility trials too. And akc nationals as well. And yes in general they do do flyball better than purebreds. Most the record holders are mixed breed teams. I believe currently its border whippets. If you look at the top mixed breed dogs in agility you'll notice a number of them in the lists.


----------



## missc89 (Jan 20, 2015)

Doodle mixes happened because people who LOVE dogs and were allergic wanted another alternative than just the few dogs that were considered 'hypoallergenic' - same with the cocker mixes. Look! A reason to breed dogs! Companionship for those who are allergic!

Guide dogs - not breed specific, depends on temperament

War dogs - not breed specific, depends on temperament

Therapy dogs - not breed specific, depends on temperament

Herding dogs - yes some people still use dogs to herd

Acting dogs - all those dogs you see in the movies, on TV, in commercials...

Search & rescue dogs - not breed specific, depends on temperament

Detection dogs - not breed specific, depends on temperament

Arsen dogs - not breed specific, depends on temperament

Tracking and hunting dogs - yes some people still use dogs to do this

Sled dogs - yes some people still use dogs to do this

Most common job for a dog now adays? Emotional Support Animal - not breed specific, depends on temperament

In fact, there is an entire television series called "Dogs with Jobs" https://www.knowledge.ca/program/dogs-jobs that basically debunk your argument.

And showing and competing with dogs has been around almost as long as dogs have been - so the breeders are continuing this BECAUSE this is what the dog was (generally) ORIGINALLY bred for and since the job itself no longer exists, we're finding ways to make sure the dogs instincts are still utilized.

Dog sports include: 
Agility
Barn Hunt
Bikejoring
Cani Cross
Caniteering
Carting
Competitive obedience
Catchball
Degility
Disc dog
Dock diving
Dog hiking, pack hiking
Dog scootering
Earthdog trials
Field trials
Flyball
French Ring
Greyhound racing
Hare coursing
Herding (or stock dog)
Hunting
Hound trailing
Jack Russle Hurdle racing (yes they have a sport just for the JR's to hurdle race)
Lure coursing
Mushing
Musical canine freestyle
Nosework
Obedience training
Protection sports (shutzhund, PSA, service dogs)
Rally
Retrieving
Skijoring
Tracking trials
Treibball
Water work or water rescue
Weight pulling
(source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dog_sports)


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

To me it's like saying well Malinois and GSDs basicly do the same thing and I like Malinois better. Might as well not breed GSDs anymore. And mini Aussie folk.. They should just get a Sheltie. And gosh darn those papillons are totally pointless. They just look cute and make people feel good.


----------



## BostonBullMama (Apr 20, 2013)

I'm not particularly fond of Chihuahua's ... I mean what is their purpose? - Let's just throw them on the list of dogs to stop producing. *Eye roll*


An individual's feelings about one breed or crossbreed, is not enough to justify letting these historical dogs to just die out.... Even bulldogs. If anything regarding bulldogs, we SHOULD be outsourcing in their blood lines to try and IMPROVE their health because at this rate - we will lose them all eventually.


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

> well, threatened actually, probably for being banned because I don't know what buttons to push. So even though a lot was said after the above quote (which I hope I quoted correctly), I realized that the above sort of says it all.


Please tell me where this happened, because you know full well it didn't. I instructed you to use the quote button, because your way was incredibly hard to read, and part of the forum rules do indicate that you are to post in a manner that is easily readable. I even went to the trouble of creating screenshots with instructions to help you out. So before you decide to accuse a mod of threatening you next time, be very, VERY sure that that's actually what happened.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

Also, ALSO poodle mixes were most certainly happening before this doodle craze was a thing. When I was a kid we had poodle mixes because my mom was otherwise allergic to dogs.


----------



## Remaru (Mar 16, 2014)

Xeph said:


> As someone looking for a service dog that has been unable to find a suitable candidate due to size and health issues, I'd vehemently disagree with you.



I was going to compose a whole post but I'll just agree with Xeph who said it better than I would have. My SD candidate is a purpose bred farm dog mix. I'm very happy with his breeder right now.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Also just throwing out that I haven't ever seen rejects from sport mix litters. They are not easy to get your hands on. I don't imagine any get sent to unsuspecting families. Trust me I've looked at most the breeders. Most the time they're not even advertised. You have to be in the know to even find one. 

Have you ever met a sport mix? They are not all frenzy. In fact one draw for me is I find especially the borderstaffies to turn on really well but also turn off really well. They are like any high drive dog bred for any specialty. Not for everyone but great for those who have them. I wouldn't want all dogs to be generic dogs. I quite like having choices in who to bring home.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

I am still trying to figure out why Otterhounds should not be bred any more.... Since Otters are protected.... But wait they are not..... Otter hunting is legal in many places....


I did find out this interesting tidbit... Under Otter Regulations in Michigan......

"Persons under eight years of age may not obtain a kill tag for bobcat, otter, fisher or marten." 

So that Kindergarten otter hunting class trip is called off..... 

You have to be 8 years old to kill otters in Michigan. Does not say a word about not being able to use dogs though......


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

Laurelin said:


> So just curious is it ok to breed Alaskan huskies for sled races? Also mixes. Also for sport. Ok because the sport is older than flyball?
> 
> I also don't have an issue with doodles if bred well. But you are not very informed about flyball mixes. Most I have seen have good lines especially the border whippets. They typically are performance whippet x performance BC lines. The terrier mixes too especially the border staffs. Not all breeders are what is call 'good' but I have not seen a litter without health testing. Sport people are all about health testing.
> 
> Why would I want one? Because I like them and enjoy them? I'm a big fan of herder x terriers and yes I have the shelter version right now. But I like that sport mixes are bred for structure and with known pedigrees and health testing. It's not the same as getting a maybe border collie mix from a shelter. Why is this type of breeding worse than any other type of dog breeding for a sport? And why is breeding for a sport a bad thing at all? People I know with sport mixes are very happy with their dogs. They are hardy and athletic dogs.


Oh...well....I left for about 20 minutes to attend to other things, wanting to come back and talk about breeding mixes for "companionship" and come to find out the flyball people have "moved on" from the Border Jack to now border whipppets....gosh darn it...can't keep up with all this "fanciful" breeding going on. So the border jacks weren't fast enough....so let's infuse some whippets? So this is actually interesting since this actually a subject concerning white....and I know whippets. So now we have people..."performance" people, while they may be familiar with one breed (maybe) are now adding a new breed that they probably know nothing about, genetically speaking. 

You say "sport" people are all about health testing....and perhaps that is your personal experience, but I've seen some very different things. In my experience with "performance" or "sport" people, if they get a dog that is outstanding, they will care less about the testing/risks. The thing is...when you breed a star, whether performance or show or any other thing, if they prove out through either testing or breeding they have an issue, the human ego wins out. Why? Because humans will kill themselves before admitting they did something wrong when they built that house of cards. 

I find it endlessly fascinating that many "pure-performance" breeds only have maintained for DECADES they wouldn't bow to the AKC are suddenly....whoops...now AKC recognized. This includes the border collie, this includes the majority of **** hounds....this includes many "obscure" spaniel breeds quietly enjoying "real" life existence in Europe who are now being sought for "show" recognition. I used to make fun of "**** hounds" very long ago, before the internet, but I voraciously loved to look at magazines and books about dogs, no matter the breed. The coonhound folks...I keep mentioning them because as a teen, my mother had to find new housing for me and her, and the cheapest place was a house who our next door neighbor kept a whole kennel full of coonhounds. So I would look at magazines and books about the best coonhounds and they were deplorable concerning conformation standards....the BEST of the best had horrible shoulder, horrible toplines...they were just WRONG. Well...30-40 years later...I am humbled.

My neighbor had them all...redbone, walker, bluetick...his whole house was stuffed raccoons....rather creepy to me at the time. He probably never heard of the AKC....and would have poo-pooed the thought of it all. His dogs didn't have straight toplines or correct this or that....they were simply his hunting dogs. His "world" was hunting...and quite frankly, he didn't CARE about placing the dogs that didn't cut the mustard in "politically correct homes." They were probably killed. 

So take a deep breath, because I'm sure some people are gasping...go back to the beginning of the quote....you say you don't have an issue with the "doodle" dogs IF WELL BRED. Well...what BODY is out there to determine that? I once worked at a boarding kennel where one of our regular clients was a "doodle" of some sort...the dog was stone deaf. LUCKILY he was owned by compassionate people, and they kept him and loved him, but they ALSO didn't know he was deaf when they got him. They didn't want a deaf dog. If they had KNOWN he was deaf, they wouldn't have taken him (I know this because I TALKED to his owners). They felt duped and were angry, but thankfully they embraced this dog...NOT a lot of people out there like this. He would have been returned and he would have been killed. 

When I retired from the military and wanted to work with training dogs as a business, there was someone in my area who had been very successful in doing that....so of course, I sought her out and she was a great source of information for me, because she was big time into the GSD as a COMPANION dog. So our histories matched. Her BIGGEST clients back then (2003-2007) were "DOODLE" dogs. They were all the rage during that time period...because of that whole "hypo-allergenic" things...yet, when I was at her house with all of her "doodle" dogs...she had siblings who looked nothing alike. Some had the poodle-type coat, some had a more smooth coat...ALL were at her house because, despite the promise of temperamental stability due to poodles/labs/goldens....that promise fell apart. These were supposed to be "no-brainer" dogs!!!!

Finally...you ask me about my thoughts regarding Alaskan Huskies. Meaning...the dogs that are bred in order to compete in the Iditarod race. Who knows, perhaps this is the genesis which gave people license to concoct and experiment. I'm sure most of us have seen these "wonderful" kennels of successful Iditarod contestants. It is a very secretive affair...NO breeder has actually ever, on camera told of their specific "formula" for their dogs....take your pick....Hounds....both sight and scent....herding....who knows...we NEVER SEE the genesis, only the outcome. What happens to the failures? We ARE talking about Alaska...mostly remote Alaska...it is not like it a ripe ground for placing failed breeding experiments. Fellow mushers aren't going to buy dogs sold by other mushers...WHO IS BUYING THE FAILURES???? I love the "mystique" of the Iditarod as anybody else, but if one actually cares about the dogs...it is sort of like the Oz...."what is behind the curtain?" Nobody wants to talk about that.


----------



## missc89 (Jan 20, 2015)

PaddiB - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence <--- argument fallacy

In fact, to aid you in proper debate tactics, here are ALL of the fallacies that people tend to fall in to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

> So take a deep breath, because I'm sure some people are gasping...go back to the beginning of the quote....you say you don't have an issue with the "doodle" dogs IF WELL BRED. Well...what BODY is out there to determine that?


What BODY is out there to determine if any dog - mixed or purebred - is WELL BRED?


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

cookieface said:


> What BODY is out there to determine if any dog - mixed or purebred - is WELL BRED?


Haha, I was thinking that too . And whose definition of "well-bred" would they use? 

I don't think Alaskan Huskies were bred just to run in the Iditarod. I think they were used for, hmm, actual daily transportation maybe. So you just threw whatever dog was hanging around into the mix. I don't think their breeding practices were/are especially secret either. I will say that I don't think many of them deal with rejects/washouts in an acceptable manner but that's rural, utilitarian life for ya. The more they're needed for a utilitarian purpose, the less compassion they'll be treated with when they can no longer perform.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

> Fellow mushers aren't going to buy dogs sold by other mushers


Uh...yeah, they do.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I have tried reading that post and cannot really glean what you are trying to say out of it. :/

All I can tell you is flyball mixes are definitely not being thrown in shelters or otherwise dispose of. They are pretty much as advertised and are not easy to come by. And yeah the breeders I've seen do health test. And yes there's more than just borderjacks. Border collie, border terrier, rat terrier, bearded collie, whippet, Malinois, jack Russell, Staffy bull. I've even seen mini Aussie. Some breeders are breeding further down the line and some stick to 50/50 crosses.


----------



## missc89 (Jan 20, 2015)

Also - Alaskan Huskies aren't actually recognized by the "AKC" even though they are one of the most popular and widely used dogs for sledding. Because they're a mix breed. Or a mutt.

Additionally, as things change and people evolve and we further our knowledge in scientific areas of study, and get better scientific tools, things tend to change.along.with.it.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

PaddiB said:


> Oh...well....I left for about 20 minutes to attend to other things, wanting to come back and talk about breeding mixes for "companionship" and come to find out the flyball people have "moved on" from the Border Jack to now border whipppets....gosh darn it...can't keep up with all this "fanciful" breeding going on. So the border jacks weren't fast enough....so let's infuse some whippets? So this is actually interesting since this actually a subject concerning white....and I know whippets. So now we have people..."performance" people, while they may be familiar with one breed (maybe) are now adding a new breed that they probably know nothing about, genetically speaking.
> 
> You say "sport" people are all about health testing....and perhaps that is your personal experience, but I've seen some very different things. In my experience with "performance" or "sport" people, if they get a dog that is outstanding, they will care less about the testing/risks. The thing is...when you breed a star, whether performance or show or any other thing, if they prove out through either testing or breeding they have an issue, the human ego wins out. Why? Because humans will kill themselves before admitting they did something wrong when they built that house of cards.
> 
> ...


883 words and after reading them, my question is..... Huh?


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

Effisia said:


> Ha. As someone who is absolutely in love with a very recent breed that was bred for companionship... well, I definitely have to disagree! Eurasiers as the absolute perfect fit for me (thanks Kuma'sMom!) and no other breeds have come close to ticking off every one of my boxes. So yeah, you won't find me arguing about new breeds!


Obviously, I get it...the prevailing theme of this entire forum is that nobody wants to actually understand dogs...they only want to breed, and breed, and breed, various purebreds to other purebreds in order to get some sort of panacea that that neatly fits into the ever diminutive lifestyle of each and every person. 

"companion" breeds....and geez...."emotional assistance" breeds? Really? We need to BREED dogs to accomplish this? In case people forget, I'm not some sort of "left-winger", I used to breed dogs. I don't have some sort of "weird agenda" regarding shelter dogs or anything else. If someone needs "emotional assistance" and they think that ONLY a dog "bred" for emotional assistance will fill the bill....then, you don't understand dogs, and thus, you won't get any better. Sometimes the BEST emotional assistance you can get is to actually get off your butt and HELP a dog that has been through crap, which I have, and realize that "bonding" helps BOTH of you through strength. Why breed placid to help placid? What does THAT accomplish?

I'm still living with a PHENOMENAL dog that yes, I bred...he is GORGEOUS in all aspects of AKC or any other "standard." Yet....the poor guy has issues. Both of his parents were stars...yeeeeet...he's WEIRD. I'd have placed him....yet I knew he probably wouldn't thrive, because while "I" understood him...most people can't. At home, where he was born, where he feels comfortable, he is a DELIGHT. He is funny, expressive, he brings me the ultimate joy. I keep him because he is A DOG that needs my help, and yet, I realize I need him too. 

There are growing organizations out there that are training/rescuing dogs ONLY from shelters. SAR dogs, bomb-sniffing dogs, cancer-sniffing dogs, AGILITY dogs...whatever...they find them in shelters, and MANY on death row...days from euthanasia. Because it is NOT about breeding BC and whippets, or Jacks, and BC's, etc...it is about people recognizing the DOG....and actually understanding and harnessing the VERY behaviors (misunderstood behaviors) that landed them in the shelter to begin with. THIS is why I said the perfect dog already exists. I found it so odd that people on this list were so blind that they couldn't see that and asked me "what is the perfect dog." It was too insane a question to answer. 

The perfect dog isn't bred. The perfect dog just IS. It takes only the skill and imagination of people to realize this....which sadly, on this forum, doesn't seem to exist.


----------



## missc89 (Jan 20, 2015)

PaddiB said:


> Obviously, I get it...the prevailing theme of this entire forum is that nobody wants to actually understand dogs...they only want to breed, and breed, and breed, various purebreds to other purebreds in order to get some sort of panacea that that neatly fits into the ever diminutive lifestyle of each and every person.


I'm sorry, have you been reading posts people post here about breeding practices??? I don't think I've met people who are more in tune with ethics and morals when it comes to dogs in my entire life. A lot of the people here are an absolutely fantastic and wonderful resource, and it pains me to see comments like this.



PaddiB said:


> "companion" breeds....and geez...."emotional assistance" breeds? Really? We need to BREED dogs to accomplish this?


Lemme go back to my previous post for just a second here…

Guide dogs - *not breed specific, depends on temperament*

War dogs - *not breed specific, depends on temperament*

Therapy dogs - *not breed specific, depends on temperament*

Herding dogs - yes some people still use dogs to herd

Acting dogs - all those dogs you see in the movies, on TV, in commercials... *not breed specific, depends on temperament*

Search & rescue dogs - *not breed specific, depends on temperament*

Detection dogs - *not breed specific, depends on temperament*

Arsen dogs - *not breed specific, depends on temperament*

Tracking and hunting dogs - yes some people still use dogs to do this

Sled dogs - yes some people still use dogs to do this

Most common job for a dog now adays? Emotional Support Animal - *not breed specific, depends on temperament*


PLEASE point out to me where "we need to BREED dogs to accomplish this?" comes in - maybe you misread my post?? I bolded the information in it for you.


Also, AKC-registered does not always equal responsible breeding practices.


"Both of his parents were stars...yeeeeet...he's WEIRD." you mean your dog has quirks that are not breed standard?


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Mushers buy dogs bred by other mushers ALL the time. Dogs get moved around constantly, there's an art to putting together a good team that relies as much on how individual dogs work together as how "good" any individual dog is. 

Also, mushers absolutely keep very, very detailed pedigrees of their Alaskans and different lines are well known for different strengths/weaknesses - speed, endurance, feet, coat, etc. 

It's becoming common practice among competitive skijorers to breed greyskis (greyhound x Alaskan or Siberian husky) and what are usually called Eurohounds (pointers x Alaskan or Siberian huskies) to add speed. Skijor dogs need less coat and less endurance, and more flat out speed. So there's a purpose crossbred. 

Nobody is the boss of dogs and what can/can't be bred. Since dogs have existed, people have shaped types or breeds to fill a niche. Doodles, sport mixes (borderstaff, border whippet, border jack, etc), Alaskans, Eurohounds, greyskis... they are all filling needs. People's need for dogs to do specific things didn't suddenly end when the AKC was founded.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

...I am so confused by this thread. Sport mixes are still health tested. The dogs bred have proven themselves exceptional, by unbiased means (and in performance at that) They are still bred rarely - really rarely. The homes are screened to higher standards than 99% of purebred litters. Literally the only difference here is They are breeding two dogs of different breeds.

If that's enoughg to get you to 'breed and breed and breed whatever' I don't know what to tell you. Or say in general because...lol.

Also, just to continue to blow your mind, feists are also a whole group of purpose bred mutts, much likemalaskan huskies but for hunting.


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

> "companion" breeds....and geez...."emotional assistance" breeds? Really? We need to BREED dogs to accomplish this? In case people forget, I'm not some sort of "left-winger", I used to breed dogs. I don't have some sort of "weird agenda" regarding shelter dogs or anything else. If someone needs "emotional assistance" and they think that ONLY a dog "bred" for emotional assistance will fill the bill....then, you don't understand dogs, and thus, you won't get any better. Sometimes the BEST emotional assistance you can get is to actually get off your butt and HELP a dog that has been through crap, which I have, and realize that "bonding" helps BOTH of you through strength. Why breed placid to help placid? What does THAT accomplish?


All you've accomplished with this is prove that you have NO understanding of emotional and mental disabilities, because it's nowhere near that simple. Most people with ESD's live in apartments, condos or other rental housing, hence the whole existence of the laws regarding Emotional Assistance Animals. That means restrictions on size, noise level, the whole gamut. The vast majority of dogs in shelters are large mixes, which are not at all suitable. Then add that for many people with anxiety or depression, trying to help a rescue overcome crap, as you put, does NOTHING to help but rather INCREASES their anxiety! I suffer from social and general anxiety, sensory processing disorder and ADHD. I needed a small dog that isn't a big barker indoors that is highly social with other people, as it forces me to get out and be social, and my Pug, Kuma, fits that job, and yes, it is a job, perfectly. I would highly recommend educating yourself on both dogs and issues like mental and emotional disorders before continuing to spew such ignorance.


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

> Obviously, I get it...the prevailing theme of this entire forum is that nobody wants to actually understand dogs...they only want to breed, and breed, and breed, various purebreds to other purebreds in order to get some sort of panacea that that neatly fits into the ever diminutive lifestyle of each and every person.


Have you read anything written on this forum?


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

> I'm not some sort of "left-winger"


What the crap? What does this have to do with ANYTHING!?



> What does THAT accomplish?


People having a pet they enjoy?


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

I am going to start breeding dogs that will run out in the pasture, catch a cow and retrieve it back to you......

I shall call them Labrastralian Cattle Retrievers. 

And I have the dogs to accomplish that. Timing is perfect. Keely is in Heat..... She and Merln are going to have sexy alone time as soon as I get home.....


----------



## missc89 (Jan 20, 2015)

cookieface said:


> Have you read anything written on this forum?


I asked the same question :laugh:


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

Xeph said:


> People having a pet they enjoy?


Why would anyone want that? That's just crazy talk.


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

cookieface said:


> Why would anyone want that? That's just crazy talk.


Right? How DARE I want a dog that perfectly meets my needs and helps to minimize my anxiety!


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

I guess you're saying that no dogs should be bred then? I guess I'm missing some point somewhere. Or do you think they should only be bred for work or what? What about the already-existing companion breeds like Papillons or Pugs? I'm just so confused as to what your stance is on the matter.

Also, there are "only" about 4 million dogs ending up in shelters in the US every year (ASPCA says 3.9 million dogs). And we need 8-9 million dogs a year to keep numbers steady. So not everybody can get a dog at a shelter. I agree that too many dopes who shouldn't be breeding are breeding but I don't think that's breed/mix dependent. And I know that shelter deaths aren't the whole story. 

And, yeah, it doesn't say anything good that nearly half of the dogs produced in this country end up in shelters. That's pretty pathetic. But don't you think that breeding dogs that people want and can live with, fitting their lifestyle, will help keep dogs out of shelters? I don't think sticking every old lady with an adolescent Lab from a shelter will really work out :/.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Are papillons exempt from the 'no companion breeds' thing because they're an older breed?


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

I actually did consider, academically, that I had the means to create my own Border-Rat. It would have meant keeping Molly intact until she was proven in sport, actually doing the crazy work to prove her, and then health testing her. Jack's already proven in performance and conformation and has the health testing finished. Finding homes would be reasonably easy through agility channels, even being new to the game.

Was never going to be more than an academic consideration, though. I don't have the experience OR time to get Molly to a place where I'd consider her sufficiently proven, even if she has the ability to get there (and who knows), Jack's crazy soft temperament is something I'd consider a flaw, I don't have the breeding experience and Molly's got a dead end on one 1/4 of her pedigree which means who the heck knows what's lurking back there. Not sure I Like some facets of her temperament, either. and I don't have knowledge to put things together right.

Basically it was just a 'I have these two purebreds' thing rather than really liking enough of THOSE TWO DOGS and I lack all relevant experience. I'm not stupid and I know better, as do most people on this forum. 

Plus, a whole litter of puppies doesn't sound fun to me. At all.. 

If I ever did breed, though, I bet you can guess what it would be. And it wouldn't be a purebred anything.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Dogs have four legs a muzzle, two ears and a tail (unless it has been docked)
I am only pointing out the obvious because in case anyone has not noticed...... No matter what comments anyone makes.... Paddi will write an essay, sans punctuation and any resemblence of sentence structure, telling you why you are wrong.....


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Yeah Im confused. Do you not think any dogs should be bred? I would have to disagree there.

By the way I do agree you can find awesome dogs in rescue. I have one shelter mutt who is pretty darn great.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Dogs have four legs a muzzle, two ears and a tail (unless it has been docked)
> I am only pointing out the obvious because in case anyone has not noticed...... No matter what comments anyone makes.... Paddi will write an essay, sans punctuation and any resemblence of sentence structure, telling you why you are wrong.....


I saw a three legged dog once You're wrong.


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

CptJack said:


> I saw a three legged dog once You're wrong.


I saw a TWO legged dog on FB, so you're BOTH wrong.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Amaze-Bob only has TWO legs AND doesn't have a tail. He's obviously a rare monkey.

(Serious aside: Two of my dogs came out of trash cans, two came from breeders, one was a private adoption.)


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> Yeah Im confused. Do you not think any dogs should be bred? I would have to disagree there.
> 
> By the way I do agree you can find awesome dogs in rescue. I have one shelter mutt who is pretty darn great.


The perfect dog appears via spontanious combustion..... No breeding required....


----------



## Remaru (Mar 16, 2014)

People choosing the wrong breed, getting a dog without thinking it through, and people who don't bother to spay/neuter and just let their dogs breed at random (or breed for all the wrong reasons ie "fluffy really wants to be a mommy") are contributing more to dogs ending up in shelters than any breeding of new breeds or purposeful mixed breeding for working or companion dogs. When dogs are bred for jobs, even when that job is companionship, they are more likely to wind up fitting properly into homes and not wind up in shelters. I have 4 rescue dogs, they are great dogs. My SD prospect came from a breeder because I need to stack the deck in my favor. Some programs do use rescue dogs, but they have a lower success rate than those that use dogs from breeders.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

What do you call a dog with no legs? 



Nothing! It ain't coming no matter what you call it.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I guess my main question for PaddiB is when should a dog be bred? Do you think dogs should be bred? If not for competition (show or performance) and not for companion then.... just working dogs? I really don't know what your argument is?


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

If I had a dog with no legs I would name him stay...... And he would listen perfectly.....


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

Perhaps PaddiB is really a cat person?

(That's not an insult; I love cats.)


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

cookieface said:


> Perhaps PaddiB is really a cat person?
> 
> (That's not an insult; I love cats.)


But none of that makes sense in regards to cats either .


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Laurelin said:


> I guess my main question for PaddiB is when should a dog be bred? Do you think dogs should be bred? If not for competition (show or performance) and not for companion then.... just working dogs? I really don't know what your argument is?


I don't understand at all, either. I feel like the argument is something like... all the needs people could have possibly had have already been filled. But obviously they haven't, because society and culture are always changing. New needs appear and old ones fall away. I'm so terrible I'm just going to quote myself about my feelings about it:



sassafras said:


> Nobody is the boss of dogs and what can/can't be bred. Since dogs have existed, people have shaped types or breeds to fill a niche. Doodles, sport mixes (borderstaff, border whippet, border jack, etc), Alaskans, Eurohounds, greyskis... they are all filling needs. People's need for dogs to do specific things didn't suddenly end when the AKC was founded.


Why are today's needs somehow automatically invalid? If someone has healthy dogs, places them conscientiously and takes them back if a home doesn't work out then honestly I don't care WHAT they are breeding. Schnaltesadooterriers? Go nuts with your bad self.


----------



## SirviRavenWind (Dec 1, 2014)

PaddiB said:


> Obviously, I get it...the prevailing theme of this entire forum is that nobody wants to actually understand dogs...they only want to breed, and breed, and breed, various purebreds to other purebreds in order to get some sort of panacea that that neatly fits into the ever diminutive lifestyle of each and every person.


I would think that many here understand dogs just fine. What I would like to know is what you think we don't know? Not everyone wants to breed and breed. I would love to breed and may someday, I would even love to do a cross or two that interest me. 


> "companion" breeds....and geez...."emotional assistance" breeds? Really? We need to BREED dogs to accomplish this? In case people forget, I'm not some sort of "left-winger", I used to breed dogs. I don't have some sort of "weird agenda" regarding shelter dogs or anything else. If someone needs "emotional assistance" and they think that ONLY a dog "bred" for emotional assistance will fill the bill....then, you don't understand dogs, and thus, you won't get any better. *Sometimes the BEST emotional assistance you can get is to actually get off your butt and HELP a dog that has been through crap, which I have, and realize that "bonding" helps BOTH of you through strength. Why breed placid to help placid?* What does THAT accomplish?


I find this statement disrespectful to the breeders, owners/handlers, and the dogs themselves.
You do understand how breeding works since you said you were a breeder then I fail to get why to don't understand the breeding of assistance dogs?
The bold part is really annoying I know some service people that can't do so without the assistance a of a ESD, some are rescues others were bred from 2 parents that proved in temperament 

The perfect dog* DOES NOT EXIST*- for the statement that you yourself wrote, the dog is not perfect the situation and relationship is a factor in making it seem a perfect fit. That is what I meant when I posted before. The problem with this is that it is unlikely that the dog one brings home will fit that well, so what would your solution be? rehome? such a thing would be hard for many to do.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Whoa. I missed this. 



> Why breed placid to help placid.


This is one of the most insulting things I have *ever* read, and in regards to the human and the dog. Most EA dogs are anything but "placid" and people with mental health issues sure as heck aren't. Jeeze.


----------



## missc89 (Jan 20, 2015)

CptJack said:


> Whoa. I missed this.
> 
> 
> 
> This is one of the most insulting things I have *ever* read, and in regards to the human and the dog. Most EA dogs are anything but "placid" and people with mental health issues sure as heck aren't. Jeeze.


Yeah I would've taken personal offense to this if strangers' opinions on the internet mattered that much to me. I know why I need an ESA and I don't feel the need to prove it to the skeptics who don't understand my situation and refuse to ask, or even try to empathize.

If yee (general you) honestly believes that anxiety or depression makes one placid, yee do not understand mental health issues.


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

CptJack said:


> Whoa. I missed this.
> 
> 
> 
> This is one of the most insulting things I have *ever* read, and in regards to the human and the dog. Most EA dogs are anything but "placid" and people with mental health issues sure as heck aren't. Jeeze.


Yeah, no one who knows either me or Kuma would EVER describe either of us as placid, but we compliment each other perfectly.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

missc89 said:


> Yeah I would've taken personal offense to this if strangers' opinions on the internet mattered that much to me. I know why I need an ESA and I don't feel the need to prove it to the skeptics who don't understand my situation and refuse to ask, or even try to empathize.


I'm not really upset/affected by strangers on the internet, but I'm kind of amazingly stunned that anyone can be that ignorant and oblivious about it. I tend to forget people can ACTUALLY be that jerky about stuff.


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

CptJack said:


> I'm not really upset/affected by strangers on the internet, but I'm kind of amazingly stunned that anyone can be that ignorant and oblivious about it. I tend to forget people can ACTUALLY be that jerky about stuff.



Same here, CptJack. Same here.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

CptJack said:


> This is one of the most insulting things I have *ever* read, and in regards to the human and the dog. Most EA dogs are anything but "placid" and people with mental health issues sure as heck aren't. Jeeze.


 LOL, wouldn't a mental/emotional health problem be the opposite of "placid"? 

I saw that but didn't know what PaddiB meant by "breeding placid to help placid". It's just kind of word salad to me and so I didn't want to react unnecessarily. But if that's what was meant. . .dude. That's not cool. I don't know if I would need an ESA---I haven't lived without a pet since I was 10 so I have no idea if I could cope without a pet or not, and I don't plan to find out---but I'm glad it's an option.


----------



## BigLittle (May 28, 2014)

> There are growing organizations out there that are training/rescuing dogs ONLY from shelters. SAR dogs, bomb-sniffing dogs, cancer-sniffing dogs, AGILITY dogs...whatever...they find them in shelters, and MANY on death row...days from euthanasia. Because it is NOT about breeding BC and whippets, or Jacks, and BC's, etc...it is about people recognizing the DOG....and actually understanding and harnessing the VERY behaviors (misunderstood behaviors) that landed them in the shelter to begin with. THIS is why I said the perfect dog already exists. I found it so odd that people on this list were so blind that they couldn't see that and asked me "what is the perfect dog." It was too insane a question to answer.
> 
> The perfect dog isn't bred. The perfect dog just IS. It takes only the skill and imagination of people to realize this....which sadly, on this forum, doesn't seem to exist.


That would be fun. Let's try and place low-function autistic kids, people with anxiety disorder, victims of early childhood abuse, and disabled veterans with PTSD with my local shelter dog population.
Most of it at any given time seems to be: 
-hyperactive pit mixes with no bite inhibition and very powerful prey drives and dog reactivity (who may or may not be from the inner-city fighting lines bred for aggression and mental instability)
-neurotic hyperactive GSD mixes with aggression and health problems
-Neurotic toy breeds, also with aggression and health problems
-Chihuahuas who have aggression problems and bark 24/7 and pee in the house
-Field trial line labs who must fetch 24/7 and will knock people over to get the ball
Edit: I forgot, mastiff breeds/mixes with both health problems and rage syndrome or extreme fear which causes severe aggression


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Willowy said:


> LOL, wouldn't a mental/emotional health problem be the opposite of "placid"?
> 
> I saw that but didn't know what PaddiB meant by "breeding placid to help placid". It's just kind of word salad to me and so I didn't want to react unnecessarily. But if that's what was meant. . .dude. That's not cool. I don't know if I would need an ESA---I haven't lived without a pet since I was 10 so I have no idea if I could cope without a pet or not, and I don't plan to find out---but I'm glad it's an option.


I don't rent or have any other potential benefit to having a dog declared an official ESA, but frankly speaking I have a whole rainbow of anxiety disorders and it kind of makes me the opposite of placid? In fact, when I'm having some kind of issue with my anxiety I can't sit still, can't focus, and am in every way possible the opposite of placid. More like a reactive dog who is overstimulated. The benefit I get from having the dog is that I FOCUS ON THE DOG and can sort of zone out the rest of the stimulation AND stuff going on in my head so I can focus. 

I suppose a placid dog might help me, but I really get more out of having a dog actively engaging me in some way.

(I went about a year without dogs. In some ways it was kind of nice. In others, no. Bad. Bad idea. Never again .)


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

Willowy said:


> But none of that makes sense in regards to cats either .


Does any of this make sense in regard to anything?



> Sometimes the BEST emotional assistance you can get is to actually get off your butt and HELP a dog that has been through crap, which I have, and realize that "bonding" helps BOTH of you through strength. Why breed placid to help placid?


What the what? That's a highly insulting and uninformed comment.


----------



## missc89 (Jan 20, 2015)

CptJack said:


> I don't rent or have any other potential benefit to having a dog declared an official ESA, but frankly speaking I have a whole rainbow of anxiety disorders and it kind of makes me the opposite of placid? In fact, when I'm having some kind of issue with my anxiety I can't sit still, can't focus, and am in every way possible the opposite of placid. More like a reactive dog who is overstimulated. The benefit I get from having the dog is that I FOCUS ON THE DOG and can sort of zone out the rest of the stimulation AND stuff going on in my head so I can focus.
> 
> I suppose a placid dog might help me, but I really get more out of having a dog actively engaging me in some way.
> 
> (I went about a year without dogs. In some ways it was kind of nice. In others, no. Bad. Bad idea. Never again .)


I feel the exact same way when my anxiety decides to rear its ugly head. I am SO looking forward to having Sterling because I'll actually have something ELSE to focus on for the first time in my life instead of my own problems. I really cannot wait for the amount of time Sterling is going to be taking up in my life because I really do believe he's going to be the biggest help in the oddest ways, BECAUSE his breed is so active and engaging and totally NOT placid.


----------



## SirviRavenWind (Dec 1, 2014)

cookieface said:


> Does any of this make sense in regard to anything?
> 
> 
> 
> What the what? That's a highly insulting and uninformed comment.


Well at least now I know I was not the only one that was offended. That just made me mad so that was why I had bolded it.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

SirviRavenWind said:


> Well at least now I know I was not the only one that was offended. That just made me mad so that was why I had bolded it.


No, I think we just skimmed past it in the block of words. Or, well, I did. When you quoted and bolded it I saw it.


----------



## Remaru (Mar 16, 2014)

CptJack said:


> I don't rent or have any other potential benefit to having a dog declared an official ESA, but frankly speaking I have a whole rainbow of anxiety disorders and it kind of makes me the opposite of placid? In fact, when I'm having some kind of issue with my anxiety I can't sit still, can't focus, and am in every way possible the opposite of placid. More like a reactive dog who is overstimulated. The benefit I get from having the dog is that I FOCUS ON THE DOG and can sort of zone out the rest of the stimulation AND stuff going on in my head so I can focus.
> 
> I suppose a placid dog might help me, but I really get more out of having a dog actively engaging me in some way.
> 
> (I went about a year without dogs. In some ways it was kind of nice. In others, no. Bad. Bad idea. Never again .)


Blue is placid, for my son she is excellent like a worry stone or something. She just snuggles with him. I think stoic was a better word for Duke but he was perfect, just the right level of engagement. I know I am better with my dogs than without. When my anxiety is bad I can get mean, the dogs give me another focus and help me stay calm. I am far more likely to go somewhere if I can take a dog with me, I don't have to wonder what I will do and worry about all the people who will want to talk to me. I am doing better socializing right now.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

BigLittle said:


> That would be fun. Let's try and place low-function autistic kids, people with anxiety disorder, victims of early childhood abuse, and disabled veterans with PTSD with my local shelter dog population.
> Most of it at any given time seems to be:
> -hyperactive pit mixes with no bite inhibition and very powerful prey drives and dog reactivity (who may or may not be from the inner-city fighting lines bred for aggression and mental instability)
> -neurotic hyperactive GSD mixes with aggression and health problems
> ...


Hmm. There must be a way to say that a shelter dog may not be the best choice for every situation without implying that all or even most shelter dogs are defective. Let's not go there.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Willowy said:


> Hmm. There must be a way to say that a shelter dog may not be the best choice for every situation without implying that all or even most shelter dogs are defective. Let's not go there.


Most dogs in shelters ARE 'hyperactive and neurotic', I'll give it that. They are, however, hyperactive and neurotic because they're in a loud, chaotic, noisy place under loads of stress. That tends to be why the tiny/small dogs are snappish, too. Get most of those dogs out of their run and they're okay or better than okay. 

Not that they'd fit every situation either, or even that the dog that would be ideal for a person with autism would be the best dog for a vet with PTSD, just. You know. Let's not unfairly judge dogs based on acting a bit crazy when they're stuck in kennels with other dogs barking and nasty smells and are away from home/where they knew and the like. At the very least they're going to have energy to burn from getting little to no exercise.

So, yeah, basically what you said.


----------



## BigLittle (May 28, 2014)

Willowy said:


> Hmm. There must be a way to say that a shelter dog may not be the best choice for every situation without implying that all or even most shelter dogs are defective. Let's not go there.


Yeah, I probably could have worded it better...

It is hard to tell as a layperson, though, if they will turn out to be bombproof outside of that setting. Our dogs? They're great, but I can almost guarantee if put in the shelter system the chi would be a big mess of nerves and the mastiff would be very standoffish, if not downright aggressive. On the flip side, our last chi looked bombproof in the shelter, but ended up having a lifetime of fear aggression problems...

I should have said that good dogs do come from shelters, but many may need a lot of work to be SD material and many more would never be up to par with any amount of training.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

A lot of dogs gotten directly from breeders will never be up to par for service dog work either. It's hard to find a dog with the proper SD temperament.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Willowy said:


> A lot of dogs gotten directly from breeders will never be up to par for service dog work either. It's hard to find a dog with the proper SD temperament.


Which is why it's a thing that's bred for ;-) (see also thread to this point). It doesn't make it a sure thing but it DOES increase the odds. Mix or pure.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

PaddiB said:


> If someone needs "emotional assistance" and they think that ONLY a dog "bred" for emotional assistance will fill the bill....then, you don't understand dogs, and thus, you won't get any better. Sometimes the BEST emotional assistance you can get is to actually get off your butt and HELP a dog that has been through crap, which I have, and realize that "bonding" helps BOTH of you through strength. Why breed placid to help placid? What does THAT accomplish?


Of all the arrogant, dismissive (and I have said a few of those over the years myself on this forum. So I know a thing or two there.) things I have seen said by people on this forum.... This takes the cake..... Additionally, what you said was hateful and mean spirited.....


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

In other news.....

I am going to start a project to breed legless dogs....

I think there could be a huge market for them..

Folks that are too lazy to walk their dogs, do not want to build a fence... Or just really suck at training...


Just think the dogs will get their down stays perfect from day one.


----------



## BostonBullMama (Apr 20, 2013)

PaddiB said:


> Why breed placid to help placid? What does THAT accomplish?



Toby is not a declared Emotional Support Dog - but by all means, I consider him one. 
He is a Boston Bulldog. A crossbreed. I don't know why his parents were bred - I don't even really know where he came from. I know that I got a text message on my phone and then there was a puppy on my porch. 

Before this puppy - My anxiety was drowning me. My depression had me by the throat. I was diagnosed with Agoraphobic tendencies, depression, anxiety, and PTSD. 
Before Toby - I lived in the dark with my then 2 year old son. I never opened my curtains. I rarely left the house. My son's social skills suffered greatly. I lost all my friends. My self-worth was in the toilet. I fantasized about what it would be like to stop existing. I was emotionally checked out. Gone. Done. Game Over. 

With my husband's support, I began opening the curtains again. I began talking to people through social networking to try to reconnect, but I wasn't *there*. I was more a hollowed shell of who I used to be, and I was completely addicted to my computer. Like LOSE MY SHIT if I can't escape reality through virtual worlds -addicted-. 

When my son was 4 - I got Toby. 
Getting Toby - gave my son his Mother back. And just in time too - I was also newly pregnant with my daughter. 
Getting Toby, gave me something to channel into. His training, was my new reality. He needed to be house broken - which meant I needed to leave the house - which meant I began interacting with PEOPLE again. 

Through Toby - I made friends. I went outside. I felt the sun on my face. I took my son to the park. We played. When my anxiety reared it's ugly head, Toby would step forward beside me and I knew I wasn't facing it alone anymore. It didn't matter how much help I received from my husband, Toby is what ultimately got through to me. 

My son is 6 now. I have friends, I go outside regularly, my anxiety is lesser - though still there. I talk to strangers. I don't fear everyone.... 

What purpose did my dog serve? My dog saved my life. 

If your point was that you don't need a specific breed of dog to accomplish what Toby has done for me, then sure - I agree. But one day, when the inevitable happens and Toby is no longer my partner - I will sure as hell be looking for another dog that embodies everything that Toby has come to mean to me.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

JohnnyBandit said:


> In other news.....
> 
> I am going to start a project to breed legless dogs....
> 
> ...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YY7HQEvMzmI


----------



## Effisia (Jun 20, 2013)

JohnnyBandit said:


> In other news.....
> 
> I am going to start a project to breed legless dogs....
> 
> ...


I'm thinking of cashing in on the "cutsie name" trend and breeding a line of Cocka-poodle-doos.

As for the rest of what PaddiB was saying, well... the complete and utter lack of any kind of understanding of mental health issues just made me roll my eyes. Heh. The whole reason behind dogs was breeding for what people wanted/needed - not just what PaddiB thinks is appropriate.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Effisia said:


> I'm thinking of cashing in on the "cutsie name" trend and breeding a line of Cocka-poodle-doos.
> 
> As for the rest of what PaddiB was saying, well... the complete and utter lack of any kind of understanding of mental health issues just made me roll my eyes. Heh. The whole reason behind dogs was breeding for what people wanted/needed - not just what PaddiB thinks is appropriate.


PaddiB is right..... It is the world that is wrong...


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Most people have dogs simply because they like dogs.... And most people just choose breeds they like... is that so bad?


----------



## Apricot (Nov 25, 2012)

Laurelin said:


> Most people have dogs simply because they like dogs.... And most people just choose breeds they like... is that so bad?


That doesn't seem radical to me at all.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

Laurelin said:


> To me it's like saying well Malinois and GSDs basicly do the same thing and I like Malinois better. Might as well not breed GSDs anymore. And mini Aussie folk.. They should just get a Sheltie. And gosh darn those papillons are totally pointless. They just look cute and make people feel good.


you are not allowed to feel good! lol


----------



## Kayota (Aug 14, 2009)

roxir is my esa and she has literally saved my life. paddib needs to try living in the real world.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

Laurelin said:


> Most people have dogs simply because they like dogs.... And most people just choose breeds they like... is that so bad?


Not always! My husband has a dog because, I threw a puppy in his bedroom. My husband's PTSD was so bad when he came back from Iraq, that he would not leave his bedroom. I figured eventually he would have to get up to let the puppy out. That was 4 years ago. Husband is far from being placid when he is having flashbacks. At least he leaves his room to let the dog out.


----------



## PaddiB (Aug 8, 2014)

BostonBullMama said:


> Through Toby - I made friends. I went outside. I felt the sun on my face. I took my son to the park. We played. When my anxiety reared it's ugly head, Toby would step forward beside me and I knew I wasn't facing it alone anymore. It didn't matter how much help I received from my husband, Toby is what ultimately got through to me.
> 
> My son is 6 now. I have friends, I go outside regularly, my anxiety is lesser - though still there. I talk to strangers. I don't fear everyone....
> 
> ...


Well, this topic has certainly gone off the rails, but I guess it now is what it is, and I am accused of being "insensitive" to mental illness which is kinda weird, since I never said anything of the sort and haven't been on this forum every single day to put out little fires attributed to me, but of course...that fire kept building with what is called the "common" enemy." So in the midst of all of that, of course there are questions from all sides concerning sled dogs and this and that. Perhaps a mental health thread should be started.

BostonMama's story is certainly poignant. Her dog did what dogs do best. She already said he was a mix. The fact that he came from "this" or "that" I will still maintain is happenstance. Good luck in re-creating what that dog did FOR YOU...because EVEN if that dog was purebred, you cannot totally "recreate" what that one dog did FOR YOU. I can tell you horror stories from my childhood...and I can tell you a great variety of dogs that helped me...when I DIDN'T have a 2 year old child, OR a husband or wife that was understanding, as you said yours was.

Look, I find it a little sad that wanting to care for a child, or dealing with an understanding husband took a back seat to a dog. If the DOG was what it took to rescue you to take responsibility, that is great... but I doubt it was the fact he was a "boston bulldog" should mean anything, except for the fact since you said you took refuge in "social media" that you "found" this particular puppy. Because quite frankly, you said it yourself...you were still "dealing" with your understanding husband because you got pregnant again. 

I DON'T know why THIS story has ANYTHING to do with what I've said, except to maybe make people feel sorry for you.

Yes, I DO have strong opinions, regarding how and why dogs help humans, and it certainly isn't because they MIMIC our timidity. And it ISN'T because of a particular breed or first generation mix. I can tell you because of MY childhood, or whatever "stresses" you want to proffer, that I also didn't want to "deal" with the reality of my "life." I was at a vulnerable time in my life when people abroad decided to attack America and fly planes into our lives. And because I was also involved with many aspects of "purebred dogs" at the time, I certainly had to do a LOT of shuffling of my life, because I was also in the military. I didn't have an "understanding husband or wife" when those planes hit, I didn't have a two-year old child to keep me going....I had a pregnant dog. 

Yep...I had EVERY reason to distance myself from that litter...I was at an age where I was trying to figure out INSANTITY of my childhood, except that my job forced me to deal with 9/11 AND this freaking litter of puppies. Yep...homes were already in stone...except there was ONE damn pup....the BANE of my life at the time...she was DIFFICULT. I knew it, because I knew my dogs, and I couldn't, in good conscious let her go to the PLACID home she was expected to go. So I kept her. As insane as my life was at the time, as insane as my knowledge of my childhood was at the time...she became my salvation among the chaos. She FORCED me to not feel sorry for myself...she forced me to believe in her, and yes, she saved me, and that would have NEVER have happened if she were simply a placid pup....thus, THIS is why I deny the "placid for placid" issue I've been raked over the coals for. WHY are we afraid of the CHALLENGE of a difficult dog? 

The "American Dream"....an understanding husband and a child....what happens when "Toby" dies and you can't find his recreation? Back to dark rooms with curtains closed, when you KNOW you have responsibilities? The point is...I have demons, we all have demons....I was dealing with "personal" demons when 9/11 happened and I also had to deal with a difficult dog, and it went WELL beyond simply just "having" to housetrain" the dog (as was the ONLY "issue" Mama indicated for this pup). 

So yes...I grew up with mental illness...I understand it very well, but I STILL fail to see why people have to BREED dogs to help deal with it. It is NOT THE DOG...it is HOW we choose to deal with them. Look at prison programs.....ALL of those dogs are taken from shelters....broken people helping broken dogs. So seriously....spare me the argument that we need to BREED "companion" dogs.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

PaddiB said:


> ...THIS is why I deny the "placid for placid" issue I've been raked over the coals for. WHY are we afraid of the CHALLENGE of a difficult dog?


Uh, it wasn't calling _dogs_ placid that you got raked over the coals for.


----------



## BigLittle (May 28, 2014)

So, if I read correctly, because PaddiB dealt with _her_ problems by helping a difficult dog, that means helping a difficult dog is the pancea for all mental problems?

Yeah, no.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

You never did answer about what your views were on breeding. 

I'm glad companion dogs have historically been bred. Papillons are pretty cool.


----------



## BostonBullMama (Apr 20, 2013)

PaddiB said:


> Well, this topic has certainly gone off the rails, but I guess it now is what it is, and I am accused of being "insensitive" to mental illness which is kinda weird, since I never said anything of the sort and haven't been on this forum every single day to put out little fires attributed to me, but of course...that fire kept building with what is called the "common" enemy." So in the midst of all of that, of course there are questions from all sides concerning sled dogs and this and that. Perhaps a mental health thread should be started.
> 
> BostonMama's story is certainly poignant. Her dog did what dogs do best. She already said he was a mix. The fact that he came from "this" or "that" I will still maintain is happenstance. Good luck in re-creating what that dog did FOR YOU...because EVEN if that dog was purebred, you cannot totally "recreate" what that one dog did FOR YOU. I can tell you horror stories from my childhood...and I can tell you a great variety of dogs that helped me...when I DIDN'T have a 2 year old child, OR a husband or wife that was understanding, as you said yours was.
> 
> ...


You are extremely ignorant. 

I didn't go into full detail in my past because it is so difficult for some people to even read that to simply _go there_ I have to put a warning up for other people who may be triggered by it. 

Toby was a HUGE part of getting myself BACK. When he dies - a part of me will die too, and yea you know what, maybe I will go backwards and sink into pitiful depression all over again because what he's done for me will never be something my own family can do for me - I'm sorry you can't understand that. You're not a mind reader, you have NO IDEA what I was going through when Toby saved my LIFE. The things I've shared on this forum barely scratch the surface of the layers upon layers of abuse, and the sacrifices I made to better my families chances. 

I would not describe myself, or others with mental illness as being placid. And i certainly would not describe Toby that way either. Toby's enthusiasm for merely existing showed me there was a reason to wake up everyday. Rolling in the grass made him smile widely, and made me appreciate the simple things. Playing ball or tug made me realize what I'd been missing out on with my son. And when Toby would run by my side in the evenings I'd forget about the icy air hitting my face, or the stabbing pain of merely breathing... we were free, we were running, our feet hit the pavement in perfect sync and it was like magic. Maybe that's extraordinarily sappy, and I know there isn't a dog in the world who could ever replace him when his time comes - and truthfully, I don't want a dog to replace him. 

When Toby dies, I want another dog who will continue where he left off and show me what life means to them, through their personality that will be anything but placid. 


As someone who is mentally ill and still, regularly, cycles through the motions - I don't know that I could take on a difficult dog. Dogs who are bred to be companions, are still dogs who are bred with a purpose - and they are no lesser than your difficult pup in which you found your own light.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

People aren't piling on you because you're a "common enemy," PaddiB. People are responding to you (calmly and rationally, I might add) because you keep saying ignorant and downright rude things.


----------



## pawsaddict (Apr 17, 2013)

PaddiB said:


> Well, this topic has certainly gone off the rails, but I guess it now is what it is, and I am accused of being "insensitive" to mental illness which is kinda weird, since I never said anything of the sort and haven't been on this forum every single day to put out little fires attributed to me, but of course...that fire kept building with what is called the "common" enemy." So in the midst of all of that, of course there are questions from all sides concerning sled dogs and this and that. Perhaps a mental health thread should be started.
> 
> BostonMama's story is certainly poignant. Her dog did what dogs do best. She already said he was a mix. The fact that he came from "this" or "that" I will still maintain is happenstance. Good luck in re-creating what that dog did FOR YOU...because EVEN if that dog was purebred, you cannot totally "recreate" what that one dog did FOR YOU. I can tell you horror stories from my childhood...and I can tell you a great variety of dogs that helped me...when I DIDN'T have a 2 year old child, OR a husband or wife that was understanding, as you said yours was.
> 
> ...


Are you actually criticizing someone's personal hardship and stacking it up against yours to see who has suffered/overcome more? 

Have you ever heard of postpartum depression? Not saying that BBM was affected by it, but I really think you need to read up on it...as well as other mental illnesses.


----------



## BostonBullMama (Apr 20, 2013)

pawsaddict said:


> Are you actually criticizing someone's personal hardship and stacking it up against yours to see who has suffered/overcome more?
> 
> Have you ever heard of postpartum depression? Not saying that BBM was affected by it, but I really think you need to read up on it...as well as other mental illnesses.


Even if you were saying I was affected - it wouldn't be untrue. 
I had terrible PPD after my first 2 pregnancies.


----------



## CrimsonAccent (Feb 17, 2012)

PaddiB, you have refused to answer my questions. Is it because I'm right? Or you can't back up your claims with a sufficient evidence?

1. What is the perfect dog? You claim that they exist "in spite of humans".

2. Do you actually believe google and knowledge gained via the internet is useless? Is it only YOUR reality that is valid in this thread? 

3. What is your actual stance on breed standards and breeding in general?

4. What dogs fit your utilitarian view of being good enough and worthy of existing? Furthermore, do you also view people that way? What have you contributed to this thread by ignoring posts and posting 1000 word rants that answer none of the questions posed to you?

5. I'm mad that you consider that the "placid should help the placid". That is an insult to people with mental illness. You are implying that they are weak and victim blaming in your posts. That's what is upsetting people.

Just hit "reply with quote" on my post and you can answer. That simple.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

I don't think companion breeds or those bred specifically to be service dogs or emotional support animals are "placid" or even supposed to be. They're supposed to be cheerful and get you out of the house, like any dog ought to be. The main thing about companion breeds is that they shouldn't be so drivey as to make their owner's life overly difficult. They shouldn't have to play fetch for hours a day or be so protective that they want to eat the mailman. The point of a companion breed is that their main drive is to be a companion to a human. Which hardly makes them placid or "watered down" (lol, we've had that thread before ) or anything like that, just that their work is different from the work other dogs are bred for. 

And seriously. An anxiety disorder is not "timidity" or weakness. Jeez. It's known that your brain creates certain neural pathways when something traumatic happens to you (and guess what? You can't choose what your brain perceives as traumatic. It could seem like a pretty stupid thing but that doesn't change those neural pathways) and that's what causes anxiety disorders.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

PaddiB said:


> Well, this topic has certainly gone off the rails, but I guess it now is what it is, and I am accused of being "insensitive" to mental illness which is kinda weird, since I never said anything of the sort and haven't been on this forum every single day to put out little fires attributed to me, but of course...that fire kept building with what is called the "common" enemy." So in the midst of all of that, of course there are questions from all sides concerning sled dogs and this and that. Perhaps a mental health thread should be started.
> 
> BostonMama's story is certainly poignant. Her dog did what dogs do best. She already said he was a mix. The fact that he came from "this" or "that" I will still maintain is happenstance. Good luck in re-creating what that dog did FOR YOU...because EVEN if that dog was purebred, you cannot totally "recreate" what that one dog did FOR YOU. I can tell you horror stories from my childhood...and I can tell you a great variety of dogs that helped me...when I DIDN'T have a 2 year old child, OR a husband or wife that was understanding, as you said yours was.
> 
> ...


Another 795 words and you are still clueless......


I do not think reading comprehension is your thing......


I also do not think you are suited for dogs.......

Pet rocks would be a better choice.....


And in the larger picture..... You have no idea of how epic this thread is.......

It is epic because Sassafras, CptJack, Willowy, Laurelin, Crantastic, Kayota, Luv Mi Pets, and myself have all agreed on a subject...... It has NEVER happened in the history of this forum......


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

Never have I wanted somebody to go away so badly. The level of misunderstanding under the guise of understanding, the level of sheer ignorance and insult, is unfathomable to me.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> It is epic because Sassafras, CptJack, Willowy, Laurelin, Crantastic, Kayota, Luv Mi Pets, and myself have all agreed on a subject...... It has NEVER happened in the history of this forum......


...Man's got a point with that one!


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

PaddiB said:


> and I am accused of being "insensitive" to mental illness .



Exactly what you did was say CRUEL and insensitive things about anyone with any sort of disability.


You can spin it.... Try and back step, deny, try to twist your own words......

But you said it, you own it, and there is NO backing out of it. 

We ALL saw it....


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

I have not been following this thread since the third page. Apparently, I have some reading to do.


----------



## ChaosIsAWeim (Feb 12, 2011)

chimunga said:


> I have not been following this thread since the third page. Apparently, I have some reading to do.


You are going to need this.opcorn:


----------



## Little Wise Owl (Nov 12, 2011)

Oh. My. Wow. This thread. lmao

PaddiB, you are something else. Carry on...


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Kuma'sMom said:


> All you've accomplished with this is prove that you have NO understanding of emotional and mental disabilities, because it's nowhere near that simple. Most people with ESD's live in apartments, condos or other rental housing, hence the whole existence of the laws regarding Emotional Assistance Animals. That means restrictions on size, noise level, the whole gamut. The vast majority of dogs in shelters are large mixes, which are not at all suitable. Then add that for many people with anxiety or depression, trying to help a rescue overcome crap, as you put, does NOTHING to help but rather INCREASES their anxiety! I suffer from social and general anxiety, sensory processing disorder and ADHD. I needed a small dog that isn't a big barker indoors that is highly social with other people, as it forces me to get out and be social, and my Pug, Kuma, fits that job, and yes, it is a job, perfectly. I would highly recommend educating yourself on both dogs and issues like mental and emotional disorders before continuing to spew such ignorance.


This.

I have ADHD and sensory processing disorder as well, I was using Josefina as an ESA but since seeing how much good she did my OH, who doesn't have a disorder but has a very high stress job, so I leg him have her and I am working on Lincoln to be an ESA and he is doing awesome! I have issues with forgetting things and he is already getting to where he reminds me if the laundry is done and I wasn't paying attention, or if it's time to start cooking lunch.


----------



## BigLittle (May 28, 2014)

When I was a preteen, I was experiencing the first bouts of what I now realize was depression. Funny thing is, what kept it from getting severe was a corn snake. One of the least difficult animals to maintain. It was because not only she is so incredibly easy to keep alive, but also, she just doesn't care about how I feel or what I've done. I would hide when I started crying and hating myself, and I found the snake would comfort and calm me down when I took her with me to hide. I would tell her how awful I was through tears and all she would do is stare off into the distance, flick her tongue, and try to crawl up my shirt and tangle my hair. If I had been in charge of anything more difficult than that snake, I probably would have just been made worse. Dog pees on floor during housetraining? I would have curled up on the floor and cried at how I couldn't even train it lol.

Even now, while most of the time I can tune out the lies my mind tells me when my (thankfully mild) depression decides to appear, I still sometimes go for the snake and hold her for a while.


----------



## Kayota (Aug 14, 2009)

BigLittle said:


> So, if I read correctly, because PaddiB dealt with _her_ problems by helping a difficult dog, that means helping a difficult dog is the pancea for all mental problems?
> 
> Yeah, no.


Faxon was supposed to be my PSD when I needed one and she was so difficult that she caused me to have an anxiety attack at least once... hm...


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> And in the larger picture..... You have no idea of how epic this thread is.......
> 
> It is epic because Sassafras, CptJack, Willowy, Laurelin, Crantastic, Kayota, Luv Mi Pets, and myself have all agreed on a subject...... It has NEVER happened in the history of this forum......


Yep this is so true. Mark this one in the books.


----------



## ForTheLoveOfDogs (Jun 3, 2007)

JohnnyBandit said:


> And in the larger picture..... You have no idea of how epic this thread is.......
> 
> It is epic because Sassafras, CptJack, Willowy, Laurelin, Crantastic, Kayota, Luv Mi Pets, and myself have all agreed on a subject...... It has NEVER happened in the history of this forum......


I have not said a word in this thread because debating this crap kinda tires me out sometimes. I would like to comment on this because it makes me laugh. What a great thread to bring you all so close together!


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

I'm not hugging ANYONE.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

sassafras said:


> I'm not hugging ANYONE.



That is okay...... I am not a group hug kinda guy.....


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

I get the feeling that most of us aren't the hugging type.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

sassafras said:


> I'm not hugging ANYONE.


ME EITHER! Your dogs maybe? But having a drink now that is a whole different story. 


Some people live in a tiny world. (and I am not talking about those who are dealing with coping issues.)


----------



## Paviche (Aug 26, 2011)

As someone who is moderately to pretty darn mentally ill, all I can say is that I WISH I was placid. I'm the exact opposite of placid. That's kind of the problem.

I'm amazed how how offensive some things said here are. Unsurprising but wildly offensive.


----------

