I just think when your breeding dogs you should look for healthy puppies and you shouldn't breed a dog that could pass down health problems to it's puppies. It should be health and temperment, not coat and eye color. :[people are born with blindness and deafness. should we stop breeding?
and b4 all u get pi$$y i was being sarcastic.
LMAO, Yes I am sure I have..........american_pit: There is no arguing. I used statements that came out of your own mouth. So I agree. Let our conversation be done. You have already exposed yourself for what you are.
A dog named Sharkey? He's shown having one blue eye and I think a brindle coat. Which begs the question if mismatched eyes are always related to the merle gene. I haven't seen that question answered, so I don't know.
I have closed this old thread but it has good info on the debate for or against Merles.The illustration dated 1962. Look at the left eye. This is a Merle trait.
Wallace's Hillbilly (unhighlighted) - For comparison purposes.
Wallace's Hillbilly (highlighted) - shows potential Merle (coat) in the highlighted section. Part of my point was to show you how registries and individuals have found Merle sometimes hard to quantify and how black and white pictures can further make this more difficult. This is also admitted to by the ADBA, which I provided reference for in my last post.
Brownish looking oval - This is in fact NOT ticking (roan) but a swatch from a blue Merle (NOT Wallace's Hillbilly). This picture is actually un-modified. If you wish I can show the full dog, parents and one grandparent with the Merle gene. I can also show many other relatives and the nature in which the gene has effected each. Ticking (roan) are generally born white and develop the ticking pattern over time. I doubt there is much to the white thing with Wallace's Hillbilly and for the other pictures of the blue Merle I have pup and adult pictures to prove it is not ticking as there has been no change.
Black and White oval. This is the brownish looking oval with a black and white effect and shows how black and white photos can hide the Merle characteristic. This can be compared against Wallace's Hillbilly in the section I highlighted to both show the relationship and the ease of confusion that the gene shows in its effects.
Other than the blue Merle all the others images are from Richard Stratton's book, which shows a history of the gene and how it tracks back to the 1950's at least.
Interestingly enough the Old Family Red Nose also almost disappeared during the early 50's due to the same type of "visual" discrimination. This is also where the "fashion" really began to take its foothold on society in their dog choices due in great part to urbanization and less need to keep dogs (any breed) for functional purposes. Lightner who was one of the first to work with OFRN on an official basis and admitted he did not even like them even though they had proven their game worthiness.
For you bloodline buffs Lightner has two era's in his breeding the old era where he raised the OFRN and the new era where he gave them up and they almost disappeared, except for the likes of McCoy and Wallace who all but saved them form extinction within the breed.
Also interesting is that Bob Wallace kept and promoted the OFRN simply for posterity and "fashion". Stratton - p.88. For all of you who believe the Pit Bull was only bred in the good old days for fighting, this shows that its (the Pit Bull) history has also been about looks to some degree for at least the past 60+ and likely longer years. Whether or not we like the facts it is fact that most all pure breeds are kept and produced based on looks today. Few really breed for gameness or aptitude anymore (even though they claim it) but most who claim "game" will not admit that "fashion" does dictate breeding as it obvious by their output.
To this point John Colby played a large part in pushing the fashion movement as he was one of the first dogmen to bring breeding into the commercial market. This is also the time of the advent of the UKC by Bennett no doubt in recognition of the new commercial market that was developing. Bennett was merely meeting demand in the development of his registry, which was soon followed by the ADBA to also try to capitalize on the situation. For all the registry bashers you should take the time to learn what the true purpose of a registry "is" and that each is merely meeting what it perceives the need to be. Just because a smaller or less known registry exists does not negate its legitimacy.
To me when the ADBA moved from a game standard to a visual conformation standard this began their "recognition" of the trasition in how and why the predominance of people breed Pit Bulls today, which is fashion. This is also why a blue Pit will go for $600 and a brindle will go for as little as $100 or less with all other things being equal in today's market. One of the ways I can tell a game breeder over a fashion breeder is asking them what is their favorite color. A game breeder will say they like the color of "Game" what ever it is. A fashion breeder will often say they like what ever is currently most in demand Red Red Nose, Blue, etc. Personally I feel to each his own because the facts are what they are and there will always be a group that breed to an older game standard and a group that breeds to newer fashion standards. My opinion will never have an impact on either group as to why they choose to breed, so alternatively I accept and appreciate people from both groups when it comes to talking about their dogs.
To me it is an interesting parallel the Merle has with the OFRN both in terms of timelines and fashion breeding.
Right when you start to sound educated your ignorance shines through with childish insults...lol...once again you never fail to amuse me! "Pumpkin headed" lol...I will rise above and keep my mouth shut...Hello all. I'm back. I had to take another break again.
reddoggy: I apologize for not recognizing your attempt at sarcasm. But I agree wholeheartedly this will be a never-ending battle as the anti-merle folks here are too lazy (or scared) to actually do any in depth research as it may upset their perfectly balanced apple cart they have in their heads concerning merles.
As for my "bashing" bullies, I don't see where I bashed them at all. I simply called them what they were & the owners of such dogs just didn't like it.
american_pit: The issue was not the club being reputable the issue was the color is considered by some to be a fault & was not your argument that faults should not be bred? But if you want reputable, let's try AKC. AKC has made blue a fault in some breeds b/c of blues direct connection to CDA.
As for blues having skin issues, I remember some blues back in the 90s having health issues, but folks still bred for them. Heck, I knew a line of blues - one that is still popular to this day in fact - that not only had skin issues, but produced dogs with a predisposition to cancer, both inhalant & contact allergies (one I knew had a contact allergy to grass!), deformities of the mouth & teeth & heart valve problems among other things! Should this line of blues been culled? By traditional thinking, yes. But was it? No.
And yes, I know what hanging papers is. Thank you for the clarification though!
And thank you for the alleged info from the AADR. But I hate to break it to you my dear, but that was the registration policy for the ADBA for almost 100 years. Wait, I'm sorry, I was wrong. ADBA didn't even require photos! All ADBA required was a handwritten 3 generation pedigree & 2 signatures. This was the policy until about 1999 or so. In fact, I myself once purchased a dog in 1999. The breeder had the papers but I had to order the pedigree. When I got the pedigree back from the ADBA there were spots in the pedigree where a dog was single registered in & for the ancestry it simply said "unknown" on the pedigree lines (I got rid of this dog BTW!). So is ADBA a bunk registry as well? Please reply. I'd absolutely love to hear your opinion on this one!
And I don't know the status on amiee. But I do know when talking about the subject she said I sent in the application, I sent in the money, ect. Her first person usage lead one to believe that it was SHE who did that dirty deed! If it was not her, I would suggest she should use proper verbage next time.
aimee: You say YOU didn't do this & YOU didn't do that, but later on in your post you say it was YOU who registered the mom & litter! Are not the following your own words?
- ""I sent them pics."
- "I have PERSONALLY registered dogs of unknown heritage with them..."
I'm sure there is more, but I didn't look for all of them.
Then there's that oh-so-great company you keep ...
" and (I) know a boxerXpit who not only did they register her by pictures, but also registered a litter of puppies from her ..."
And then you question the purity of your own dogs - oops forgot - your mom's dogs that YOU registered ...
"Looking back at it now I think they ripped me off for my fifteen dollars! They lied to me"
Going by your own words on the matter you aren't any better than any merle breeder out there or any any POS bully breeder out there selling EB mixes as purebred APBTs for that matter. I would like to say what is really on my mind concerning you, but it would be exceedingly rude, so I will keep my mouth shut.
my girl: No, I don't enjoy fighting. Why do you think I have to take breaks from this place?
As for knowledgeable people, I'm sure there ARE some knowledgeable people here. But not about merle. Most people here I've seen post seem to know zero about merle. They appear to have only the very basic information concerning the pattern. So yes, while they are likely knowledgeable in general, knowledgeable in merle? Mmmmmmm ... thus far I'd have to say no.
As for the "Conspiracy Theory" idea, please see my reply to bahamutt.
As for admitting defeat, thank you for the offer, but I see no reason to admit defeat to people who for the most part have no idea about the subject on which they choose to speak on. All that would do is allow them to think they were right, when they most certainly are not.
GaPits: Thank you once again for clarification.
But I will once again point out to the general board that that Mr. Williams did NOT support mixed breeding & if at any time would a dog have applied for entry into his kennel club it would likely have been denied. He created the AADR to get AWAY from mixed breeds. As such, I doubt he would admit any. And my dogs were registered in when Mr. Williams himself has sole control of the registry. In fact, some of the older certificates on my merles were authorized & signed by Mr. Williams himself!
hell no: If it's a matter of what is best for the breed then why don't we ...
... stop breeding blues since blue is directly connected to CDA?
... stop breeding blacks since black is directly connected to follicular dysplasia?
... stop breeding white or white headed dogs since both white or white heads are directly connected to deafness?
... stop breeding catch weight dogs since it has been found bigger dogs have a 3 time higher incidence of hip dysplasia than small to medium sized dogs?
... stop breeding red dogs since it has been found red dogs often have a higher incidence of skin infections?
In fact, let me take it one step further - if we're talking about what's best for the breed, why haven't we transitioned over to the German system where a dog can only be registered & bred after it is fully physically matured & passed all health exams?? All this would be bettering the breed, but I don't see ANY of it happening any time soon (if ever). So the "betterment of the breed" thing holds absolutely no water with me.
baha : If he did not have an agenda, why would he stop at only the very elementary basic merle genetics? Why would he not have examined the subject 110% thoroughly? But he didn't. He found the info that supported his POV & stopped there. He thus rendered his article (in my eyes) self-serving & at best something worthy of wiping one's fanny with.
Now once again, I will say that had he examined merle to it's fullest, exploring ALL aspects of the allele & came to the same conclusion, I would give his article the fullest credence. But he didn't. Again, he just found info that supported his POV & stopped. So to me it's no better than a half written book report.
As for "betterment of the breed" excuse, please see my reply to hell no above.
Finally as for your picture request, I wish I had one, but I myself didn't get merles until the 90s. I have interviewed breeders & gotten pictures of dogs but as far as old, the only thing I have is an old drawing of a merle which I am sure most everyone has seen before. There is a pic of a merle in a Stratton book, but I don't know the publishing date of the book. But Mr. Stratton doesn't question the color & he has been around the breed way longer than all of us have.
kg420: I have seen several Alapaha Blue Blood Bulldogs (ABBB). I think you mat be mixing them up with Catahoula Bulldogs (CatBulls). CatBulls are usually (but not always) white with merle patches. ABBBs on the other hand are usually (but not always) merle with white Irish markings. Both breeds are beautiful dogs in their own rights.
As for blindness & deafness, a heterozygous merle (a dog with one merle parent & one non-merle parent) their eyes & ears are usually as fine as a dog of any other color. But a homozygous merle (a dog with two merle parents) can certainly be blind, deaf (or both!) as merle can be defective in it's pure form. But avoiding defects is simple - don't breed 2 merles together. Simple as that!
Now could some of these dogs been bred with an ABBB, CatBull or even a straight up Catahoula to get the color? Sure. I have always been of the opinion some of these dogs could have been mixed & never tried to pawn all merles off as pure (a point all the merle haters seem to always overlook).
BUT ... I know of merles that I am thoroughly convinced are purebred as well.
However, as I mentioned before, mixed breeds come in all colors. Here are some colors I know of that contain mixed breeds - black, blue, brindle, rednose & white. But does this mean ALL blacks, blues, brindles, etc. are mixed? Of course not! Just as not all merles are mixed. Could some be? YES. But not all are.
And not all are being bred & sold for outrageous prices. Now true, you do have some "greeders" out there who do rip people off, but again that happens in all colors. Strangely bully breeders are the worst for ripping people off & rarely are THEIR dogs merle. They're usually any color but! How ironic!
But to get back on track, there are others like myself who sell merles for reasonable prices. I have thus far sold almost all mine $150 altered. The $150 basically covers what I have in the S/N, so I make NO money on that. Others if I like the home & think they'll do right by the pup, I will GIVE them the pup free, so I'm not making money on that either. Any I sold intact were $300. Hardly what I would call "outrageous prices."
JFlowers: If someone wanted to be totally honest, the jury is out concerning merle. There is proof for a mix & there is proof for purebreds. But if one wanted to remain "true" to the APBT there is no way merles should be disallowed but those bow-legged, barrel-chested, sawed off pumpkin headed English Bulldog wanna-bes folks call bullies (or "pocket bullies") should ever be bred either, let alone bred & then called APBTs! That is IMO a much more of a deviation from true type than a dog who is in all ways APBT correct save for what some folks think is an abnormal coat color!
And as a side note, the great dog man Howdard Heinzl was of the steadfast opinion that black was not an APBT color & at one time the ADBa almost banned black & tans. And I'm all sure you remember the controversy around blues. Before merle hit the public eye many thought blues were mixed breeds as well. So this "it's not purebred" judgment based on coat color is not a new thing.
Oh well, I think I covered everything. I will be back later.