This Forum is brought to you by The Mastiff Sweet Spot and Friends of the Forum.
Sign up Calendar
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 9 of 12     «   Prev   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   Next
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #401 
Erika, Good morning!
for future reference..............

http://weather.yahoo.com/?w=12760870

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
Gammonwood

Avatar / Picture

Gammonwood
Registered:
Posts: 256
Reply with quote  #402 
Pics as promised
Enjoy!






Si & Jen

Attached Images
Click image for larger version - Name: Brindle_&_Apricot_Pied_Aug_6_2012_033.jpg, Views: 387, Size: 154.35 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: Fawn_Pied_Aug_6_2012_025.jpg, Views: 385, Size: 98.20 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: Apricot_Pied_Aug_2_2012_031.jpg, Views: 387, Size: 155.48 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: Fawn_&_Brindle_Pied_July_30_2012_021.jpg, Views: 386, Size: 164.68 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: Brindle_Pied_July_30_2012_019.jpg, Views: 386, Size: 188.07 KB 

Janine

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 1,524
Reply with quote  #403 
Si & Jen,
I LOVE them.  What characters, looks like they will certainly keep you on your toes, totally adorable.  (Now, back to finishing the DVD).
Janine.
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #404 


Herein lies the problem!

The perception is the mountain that must first be climbed, before acceptance can be achieved.

Not a new concept to be overcome, but just as formidable as in the past!

I wish you luck!

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
Holmesy

Registered:
Posts: 9
Reply with quote  #405 
They are all gorgeous! I bet that must be keeping you very busy lol
Janine

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 1,524
Reply with quote  #406 
I look at the pics and see Mastiff pups, just a different colour, imagine them solid colours or brindle and you would be saying what nice Mastiff pups they are.  I can see a similarity but still a difference between these babies and Saint pups.  I suppose, having owned a pied, and knowing him to be a true mastiff due to his nature and the love he had for me, and me him, proved to me that colour does not make the dog.
Janine.

Attached Images
Click image for larger version - Name: 25zpup200.jpg, Views: 24, Size: 6.69 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: Cover_Pups_Blue_new.jpg, Views: 24, Size: 16.34 KB 

Dozersmom

Registered:
Posts: 407
Reply with quote  #407 
I agree, the pups are simply adorable.....
__________________
Sue Havelka
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #408 
Janine, no doubt of those pups being true Mastiffs!

But when you say.... imagine them solid, or brindle, is where another issue gets involved. At first glance, the mind does not see solid, or brindle, it sees black & white patterns. Upon closer examination, by trained eyes, one can see they are not Saints.

I'm certain, over time and if enough pieds get to be seen, there would be less apprehension & confusion. But until that time, there will be resistance to this strange coloration by the general public and some long term fanciers as well.

Perhaps John Lennon's Rolls Royce may serve as an illustration of a non standard coloration...................


It's still a Rolls through & through, but it certainly evokes a different mindset of what a Rolls should look like.

Not sure if the Queen would approve!


.

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
Tracy

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,726
Reply with quote  #409 
I know these are mastiff puppies, butjust looking at those picts there is no doubt they are lovely pups, nice bone, nice rear angulation but just in my eyes I see the saint influence on this one. The curl on the ear, the Freckling on the mask, and in the tan on the back, as well as the way the mask splits acrss the face.  Even the way the ear color fades from brown to black.
a 15 week st look at the freckling and the ear color fade
so genes to hide and appear without warnng, but I think this pup illustrates that way back when when our breed was waining, the saints were used in the breed.

Biggie, my St. Bernard Puppy at 9 weeks old







__________________
Ranchlands Mastiffs http://www.ranchlandsmastiffs.com Member MCOA, SSMF, FAME Rescue Volunteer SSMR If you dont rescue, Dont Breed. We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein Ch Sherwood Ranchlands Friar Tuck Ch ( In heaven) Windypines Sir Reginald Montgomery ( in heaven) National and Internation and sooo close Ch Ranchlands Duecs Wild ( In heaven) Windy Pines Mid-night Maxi ( In Heaven) Pallone Ranchlands Diamond Lil ( In Heaven) Winsomes Ranchlands Maid Marion GrCh. Ranchlands Windimup and Watchimgo Ranchlands Amazing Grace Ranchlands Kissed By An Angel Ranchlands And The Beat Goes on' Ranchlands Truly Scrumptious Ranchlands Rumor Has It Sylvans My Cherie D"Amour at Ranchlands. Ranchlands Bring on the Big Guns
Janine

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 1,524
Reply with quote  #410 
That would have to have been from his Magical Mystery days.  Makes me dizzy looking at it lol.
With pied pups being few and far between, and with the DNA test hopefully becoming available we may see less of them in the future, who knows.  I dont think people will ever change their mindset on them not being accepted, the apprehension and confusion will continue and this discussion will go on for a long time yet.
I remember when Dozer died, it was at the Emergency Vet, they sent a fax to the clinic reporting what had happened, they had him down as a Saint X, I rang them and told them to sit at the computer and get the history up, which they did, I told them to change his breed then and there, he was not a Saint x but a pure Mastiff.  I told them to never assume anything, if they dont know a breed ask the damn owner instead of making themselves look so foolish.  So yes, the public in general will see them as Saint more than Mastiff as they have no idea.
I just hope that breeders never hide them and are open about them, embrace them as Mastiffs and find perfect forever homes for them where they will be loved. 
Janine
jollydogs

Registered:
Posts: 2
Reply with quote  #411 
as far as I am concerned they have saint blood in them
and to call them a pedigree is wrong if gamonwood could trace thier lines back farenough they would find saint, perhaps deer run
I hope for the sake of the  masttiff they can not be registered at all
even on limited register they must be desexed
the reason there is a standad is for you breeders to work towards producing as close as possible to the ideal set forth in the standard

not to go against it or try to change it because you happen to like a different color
the standard is what it is if you dont want to follow it dont
but dont try to change it for youre own selfishness

Janine

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 1,524
Reply with quote  #412 
Not even going to bother with that, but mate, do I know someone who would be the perfect match for you, one would almost think you and he were the same person.
Janine.
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #413 
Jolly, If you go back, you'll find more than just a Saint in the Mastiff heritage!

Therefore, discounting a pied's pedigree, due to non standard coloration, is distorting reality. Our present Mastiff, is basically another version of the Bullmastiff, not to mention the other earlier influences such as Danes, DDB, Newf, Talbot and Bulldog.

Using your barometer, all Mastiff pedigrees should be invalid.

When we see Dane-like Mastiffs, or any of the influences from the other breeds infused into our own, we don't say that the pedigree of that specimen should be denied! But because of a color trait, which is more distinct & obvious to all, we start to get militant.

The pied is non standard in color. Other faults in correctly colored Mastiffs, are also non standard!

Why elevate one above the next, as far as validity of pedigree is concerned?

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
brindlelove

Registered:
Posts: 278
Reply with quote  #414 
Gammonwood you can't think that we are that stupid:
" We have no intent to breed outside of the Standard." Then what the he!!is this whole thread about? You are even excited about the pending DNA test so that CREATING PIEDS WOULD BE EASIER!!!!!! Was that an OOPSIE? Then we have this " We have not stated that we will breed Pieds and sell them as Pedigree dogs, designer dogs, a new breed or any other such assumed rubbish." No you will sell them as registered dogs that you have already stated that you do not agree with the current (that is almost 200 years old) standard and this is a DIRECT ATTEMPT TO BRING BACK PIEDS (that NEVER EXISTED IN THE FIRST PLACE). Then lets get into this "Our Kennel Club prevents us from mating a limited register dog with a full register pup. We will not, like some others have done in the past, lie on our registration forms so as to conduct an under the table breeding." remember my skating the laws comment. OHH and breeding two registered dogs with the inclusion of the DNA test that has you so giddy for would be the BEST and FASTEST way to CREATE PIEDS! That's right you have no intention of watering down the breed JUST BREEDING OUT OF STANDARD ON PURPOSES!! I'm sorry but would that is would be the very definition of watering down the breed. Come on already. If you are going to post you better come at us with something more substantive and not contradictory in it's very essence. Shame on you!!!! 

__________________
You know you own a mastiff when youre dog weighs more than your wife!
brindlelove

Registered:
Posts: 278
Reply with quote  #415 
I hate the fact that there is no darn edit button to fix grammatical errors once posted as the spell check doesn't catch everything like PURPOSES should be PURPOSE.
__________________
You know you own a mastiff when youre dog weighs more than your wife!
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #416 
Quote:
 "We have no intent to breed outside of the Standard." Then what the he!!is this whole thread about?


I believe it's about a discussion & debate, regarding the merits, drawbacks & ramifications, of having pieds admitted to the standard.

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
Gammonwood

Avatar / Picture

Gammonwood
Registered:
Posts: 256
Reply with quote  #417 

Hi good people,

Thank you for all the kind comments about our pied puppies.

Tracy, I believe it’s the apricot pied colouring that throws you.  That was my immediate reaction when I first saw the photo of the apricot pied Mastiff that Steve posted earlier on. Knowing our apricot pied as I do, she doesn’t strike me at all as being a Saint. The little white patch on her face reminds me more of Van Dyke’s Mastiff with the Children of Charles I.



Pieds will no doubt be mistaken for Saints by the uninitiated, but we don’t think this makes them less valid Mastiffs. Even without Pied colours, Mastiffs often get mistaken for other Mastiff breeds.

We’re not sure it will ever be possible to identify a true pied from one that might have come from later Saint crosses and theories for the colour’s origin can’t be definitively proven. But strong cases can certainly be made.  We can only trust our history, pedigrees and knowledge of various lines and breeders. If we knew more about Pieds perhaps we would have more indicators for being able to identify and explain them more insightfully.

Also if we knew more about Pieds we might be able to observe and perpetuate the merits they may carry...if any.  We have heard of some quite remarkable attributes being associated with Parti or Pied coloured dogs and in studies of wild foxes the colouring has been associated with tameness. It would be so interesting to know what the Pied lions of dogdom bring with them. We will never know this as long as they are considered faults and unable to be fully registered. It’ so tragic to think that some may still be put down rather than have their actuality admitted to being present in a breed line.  

It seems many breeders today have lost sight of what really matters for dogs and by extension, breeds.  Mountains tend to be made out of mole hills and functionality replaced by impressive ring stacks.   Even Taunton had flexibility as noted by his views on light eye colouring, and his influence on the correct colours for the breed’s standard might have been more to do with his desire to set the breed apart, rather than what was actually valid for the breed.  I don’t believe though, that in his day pieds were ever denied registration... just 5 ring points. In previous standards a Mastiff might have only lost 2 & 1/2 ring points for being a pied.

129 years later we can still appreciate Taunton’s influence on the breed standard and how it has carried the Mastiff thus far.  But we can now also view it with a broader collective understanding of the breed and the knowledge that there is now new science that can provide opportunities for greater development within breeds.  None of this can be put to use though without our registry accepting them.  This doesn’t mean that judges have to put them up even though we think this would be perfectly reasonable to do so, if they deserved it....perhaps that will follow in time. J

Warm wishes
Jen

Attached Images
Click image for larger version - Name: Van_Dyke's_Mastiffs_with_Children_of_King_Charles_I.jpg, Views: 303, Size: 49.72 KB 

Gammonwood

Avatar / Picture

Gammonwood
Registered:
Posts: 256
Reply with quote  #418 

Brindlelove

I just realised that a possible reason for why you spend so much time slanging off at anyone that disagrees with you is not that you don’t get it, (could be wrong here though!), the real issue and pity is that you refuse to see it!

Gammonwood you can't think that we are that stupid:

We truly don’t think anyone on this thread is stupid. Every post we have made is expressing our point of view without cheap insults.

" We have no intent to breed outside of the Standard." Then what the he!!is this whole thread about?

This thread is about the validity of Pieds in the Mastiff Gene pool, pre and post standard, and whether the present Standard could be revised accordingly. It is not only about the legal colours that were agreed upon in the Standard. Almost everyone else seems to have accepted this; you seem to be the only one arguing an agenda that seems to have nothing to do with Mastiffs.
Please see every previous post we have made. Not to mention the posts of almost everyone else who has tried to bring your attitude up short and keep this thread civil. When confronted on this, (not about your facts, of which there seem to be relatively little), your immediate response is to use slander and insult, inappropriate labels and just plain rudeness. This is not arguing or debating: It is egotistical grandstanding that only highlights arrogance and attitude. You present your opposition under a mask of not tolerating BS and falsely determine that those who agree with or support us are cheerleaders- As if your life experiences give you the right to judge everyone else as inferior.

Just because people don’t agree with you doesn’t mean its BS. It looks like the one clique, that you did not grow out of was the “inferiority complex of being ignored and sidelined by lack of manners” clique.

*You are even excited about the pending DNA test so that CREATING PIEDS WOULD BE EASIER!!!!!! Was that an OOPSIE?
* and breeding two registered dogs with the inclusion of the DNA test that has you so giddy for would be the BEST and FASTEST way to CREATE PIEDS

Where did we state or infer anything like this? We advised that a test had become available. There was no giddiness for”the best and fastest way to create pieds”. Again, another wrong assumption on your part. If anything, we are excited that a pied can now possibly be mated against a non-pied carrier and throw all standard colours, and that other breeders who do not want to produce Pieds can now use the test to avoid their rare occurrences.
Our feelings about our breedings is that if we get pieds they should be recognised as Mastiffs, not errors or faults. When have we ever said we are breeding for them? We previously stated that we don’t believe this is possible. Can you understand this now? Is it plain enough for you to not twist it around further to suit your own seeming lack of argument?

Then we have this " We have not stated that we will breed Pieds and sell them as Pedigree dogs, designer dogs, a new breed or any other such assumed rubbish." No you will sell them as registered dogs that you have already stated that you do not agree with the current (that is almost 200 years old) standard

So by your reasoning every picture, image and drawing illustrating, and every written word describing Pieds in the last four centuries should be disregarded. This would include Pied Mastiffs, post and pre standard: dogs whose genes directly and indirectly contributed to the formation of our magnificent breed. Just because you delineate that there was no valid influence pre standard does not make it truth: It makes it your opinion.
Please read our posts, (in fact the entire thread) and stop making assumptions.

and this is a DIRECT ATTEMPT TO BRING BACK PIEDS (that NEVER EXISTED IN THE FIRST PLACE).

We’re not trying to bring anything back, we are trying to have recognized something that was always present.

Then let’s get into this "Our Kennel Club prevents us from mating a limited register dog with a full register pup. We will not, like some others have done in the past, lie on our registration forms so as to conduct an under the table breeding." remember my skating the laws comment.

This has been asked of you directly a number of times: How is this skating the laws?
Still no answer! If you’d rather not answer this direct question (as seems obvious), please feel free to insult further. It’s what we expect when you can’t respond intelligently.

We are not going to test for pied genes in any mating we conduct. We know it is possible for our standard coloured bitches to throw pieds. We don’t need to know or even want to know if they are present in a stud male that we might use. This is because we accept that it is a valid and historical Mastiff colour and it would just be a waste of money. WE ARE NOT TRYING TO BREED FOR PIEDS. We are trying to breed for healthy, sound dogs. Period. IF by some small chance we get Pieds, we’ll consider ourselves blessed and act accordingly AND within the law. No skates will be worn.

O! That's right you have no intention of watering down the breed JUST BREEDING OUT OF STANDARD ON PURPOSES!! I'm sorry but would that is would be the very definition of watering down the breed.

Our contention with the Standard is that we don’t believe in throwing out the pied baby with the bathwater. We are looking at it from the different view point that using a good specimen for breeding, (IF allowed), will actually enhance the breed. To us the Pied coat colour is a cosmetic issue. There are other more important structural and health issues for our Mastiffs to be considered. Maybe if you were a breeder or long time lover of Mastiffs you would understand this. Then again maybe you wouldn’t.

Really mate, it’s not that hard to grow up and stop being so insulting. If you would debate logically and with respect to differing points of view, others may stop asking you to reign in the tone of your posts, and perhaps you can even get some valid points across. Maybe you should practice what you preached when you quoted “As Albert Einstein once said "Try not to become a man of success but rather try to become a man of value”.

Si

dixierockstarr

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 955
Reply with quote  #419 
Beautiful puppies Gammonwood! May we please see the litter mates too? Can't get enough puppy pix around here!
__________________
Christin :)
Member MCOA
Mom to Bravo son of
Intl Ch Dixie Rockstarr (RIP baby),
Fiona our pound puppy,
Chloe our kitty,
And 3 handsome gentlemen Brockton, Christopher and Jordan
GinaG

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 3,433
Reply with quote  #420 
I agree with Christin..no matter what those pups are deeeelighful and I could just reach out and almost pet them..they are so damn cute. I won't get into the pied thing, it's been done to death..all I know is that these Mastiffs are in a good place, having a good time, not bickering about color..
hugs to you and the beasties too...
Gina

__________________
gina anelli
Gammonwood

Avatar / Picture

Gammonwood
Registered:
Posts: 256
Reply with quote  #421 
Hi Christin,

Here you go.

Apricot, Brindle 1 and Fawn 2













More to come.......

Attached Images
Click image for larger version - Name: Apricot_Aug_7_2012_020.jpg, Views: 285, Size: 147.87 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: Fawn_Two_Aug_7_2012_010.jpg, Views: 276, Size: 136.14 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: Apricot_July_31_2012_07.jpg, Views: 281, Size: 95.01 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: Brindle_One_Aug_7_2012_013.jpg, Views: 279, Size: 122.32 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: Fawn_Two_Aug_7_2012_031.jpg, Views: 275, Size: 110.54 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: Grace's_Brindle_One_July_30_2012_09.jpg, Views: 282, Size: 155.74 KB 

Gammonwood

Avatar / Picture

Gammonwood
Registered:
Posts: 256
Reply with quote  #422 
And Brindle 2 and Fawn 1









We love them all and it's going to be so hard to let them go.....

Si & Jen

Attached Images
Click image for larger version - Name: Brindle_Two_Aug_7_2012_030.jpg, Views: 281, Size: 133.53 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: Fawn_One_Aug_2_2012_054.jpg, Views: 281, Size: 173.90 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: Brindle_Two_Aug_1_2012_026.jpg, Views: 283, Size: 127.29 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: Fawn_One_Aug_1_2012_030.jpg, Views: 278, Size: 149.13 KB 

dixierockstarr

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 955
Reply with quote  #423 
Wow! They're gorgeous! Nice toplines. How much longer do you get to keep them? They look so big already!
__________________
Christin :)
Member MCOA
Mom to Bravo son of
Intl Ch Dixie Rockstarr (RIP baby),
Fiona our pound puppy,
Chloe our kitty,
And 3 handsome gentlemen Brockton, Christopher and Jordan
Gammonwood

Avatar / Picture

Gammonwood
Registered:
Posts: 256
Reply with quote  #424 

Hi Christin,

We are immensely proud of this litter. Our three founding Dogs (Male and 2 females) are all related to this litter so it is a very special breeding for us and something we have worked towards for 8 years.

We are the proverbial Chuffed parents ( or great grandparents LOL)

We usually let our pups go to their extremely well screened Aussie homes at 8 weeks of age.....so only a few more weeks
Our pups going to overseas homes have to be run on a little longer. This is very good and also very very hard as we bond with them and they with us.
We will be keeping the brindle and fawn pieds. They've pretty much chosen us anyway. We also could not pass up the awesome filming opportunity they present.


cheers
Si & Jen

 

brindlelove

Registered:
Posts: 278
Reply with quote  #425 
Greenwood you must NOT have read all of my posts or yours for that matter because I answered all of your retorts in the first few pages and I really do not want to repeat myself as I think this place (as is evidenced by the amount of IM I am getting in support of my views by people that for one reason or another do not want to openly object to the mighty Gammonwood) has had enough already. I you would like I will answer each one of your responses with your own words but as for today I do not have the time but I will most certainly will if you so choose. I warn you though if you though that I was harsh before I will really let the venom fly so to speak on my next post. Go reread all of YOU posts before you go down this road with me as you can tell I live for this crap!!! It might be best that we take this off line through IM since we both obviously feel strongly about our stance although the standard past and present are not on your side. Since you have contact with Steve feel free to call him and ask him about me as we have spoken in the past and about this thread in specific and he will tell you that I am a no nonsense type of guy BUT if you come at me with fact not speculation and a what if story I am very reasonable and open to new trains of thought. I put the ball in your court.
__________________
You know you own a mastiff when youre dog weighs more than your wife!
brindlelove

Registered:
Posts: 278
Reply with quote  #426 
Gammonwood
__________________
You know you own a mastiff when youre dog weighs more than your wife!
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #427 
I believe you had e-mailed me and I responded to you via e-mail only. I don't recall us ever speaking by phone.
__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #428 
An interesting perspective on Ped Danes.................




Quote:

THE PIEBALD DANE: Pinto, Parti-colored, Check: the Colour-Headed or White-factored Dane. (Der Plattenhund).

TO See the latest on coat color research in dogs, to include new info on piebaldism, CLICK HERE.

THE EXISTENCE OF PIEBALD IS NO LONGER IN QUESTION AND A COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE GENETIC TEST IS OFFERED FOR PIEBALD. SEE THE ARTICLE LINKED ABOVE FOR DETAILS OF THE S LOCUS AS DETERMINED AT THE GENETIC LEVEL.

READ THE UPDATED ARTICLE (2010) ON MANTLE GENETICS FOR INFORMATION ON HOW THESE TWO PHENOTYPES INTERACT.

There is quite a bit of confusion about the piebald* dane. There are problems that result from breed-specific & even idiosyncratic terminology, and there are problems of identificaion as well. Piebald, as a phenotype, is a common & well recognised coat pattern seen in many breeds (if not all that familar to those only involved in Danes). Piebalds are are called pinto, parti-colored & colored-headed whites. Piebalds are dogs at least 50% white (& typically much more, 80-90% being common) where there is a white base coat with a few, large round-to-oval areas of color. Typically color on the head & at the root of the tail is the last to be lost. The piebald gene is referred to by geneticists as "excessive white" for this reason & is associated with assymentry and irregularity of markings. Note piebalds are not necessarily black and white dogs: the pigment they have can be any color (e.g. blue, fawn) _&_ the piebald gene can combine with the merle & harl genes to produce what Harlequin Dane breeders have referred to as merle-heads & harl-heads. So you can have a piebald merle and a piebald harlequin. A "straight" piebald (one in phenoytpe as well as genotype) used to be called a boston-head & if you only looked at the head, the dog would seem to be a Mantle, but looking at the body, the dog has a few area with large black spots, which the Germans referred to as "plates of color," hence the German name for this phenomenon: Plattenhund.

For breeders, of first import is to be clear that the piebald dane is a disqualifying mismark that should be identified as such and typically then sold on limited registration as a non-breeding, pet-only Dane.All of the various iterations of the traditional black & white piebald in the Great Dane are genetically undermarked Mantledanes; they are not acceptable Mantledanes nor are they some kind of Harlequin. Mantledanes must have a complete blanket, not body spots. Harlequins must have the distinctive, irregular torn patches which distinguish them from parti-colored dogs, also called pintos, piebalds, etc. Black and white parti-colored or piebalds (pintos) Danes *are* sometimes bred (knowingly or unknowingly), and even shown as Harlequins. What's wrong with that, you say? Alot.

 

Firstly, the dog has simply been misidentified if called a Harlequin, & so has been misregistered. If that alone doesn't matter to you, then this next point certainly should: traditional piebalds are mismarked Mantles who do not carry & cannot produce Harlequins or Mantles on their own. This mis-identification therefore has great genetic consequences to the already confined & confused harl family gene pool. Piebald danes increase the percentage of mismarks & piebald carriers in every breeding in which they are used, and this decreases the number of correctly marked Danes in the gene pool, particularly down through the generations, and also results in the spread of this undesirable gene. Piebalds can also can increase the percentage of deaf puppies in Harlequin litters. Clearly any responsible breeder would be doing all they could to minimize the incidence of both in their litters & their bloodline. (See Cattanach/Strain. which docments all forms of piebald can and do produce both partial & complete deafness; see also "White" Danes). We also have dogs registered as "harls," "whites," "white & black," "merlikins" & even "mantle" who are genetic piebalds. All this adds to the confusion & potentially damages the gene pool. And thanks to the recessive nature of the piebald spotting allele, these piebald Danes go unrecognised & continue to be bred by folks unaware of the far-reaching consequences, and so it looks like the piebald is here to stay, and may well be increasing in frequency. There is also a growing trend of breeding piebald carriers, either Mantles with broken blankets or lightly marked Harlequins, for example, because these flashier markings are pleasing to the human eye & acceptable (if not preferred) under various breed standards.

Why is that so & exactly why is that a problem? The piebald gene is gaining frequency in our gene pool because: 1) Harlequin breeder, owners & judges often tend to favor a very lightly marked harlequin, thus unintentionally selecting for the underlying genetics of piebald, 2) far too many breeders of Harlequins use multiple mismarks on a routine basis (without testing them) in their breeding programs, thus muddying the waters perpetually, so that, 3) we currently do not have commercially viable tests for both the piebald & irish genes, which means we often are unable to ascertain which genotype individual Mantles have, which is our only point of control, given that, 4) it is practically impossible to discerne how much white on a harl came from recessive spotting (e.g. piebald) genes & how much from merle-harl dominant white gene variation. Piebald is also a problem as many do not recognise this genetic pattern occurs in merles & harlequins too. Broadly referred to as "color-headed whites" in other breeds (with carriers called "white factored"), piebalds, as a genetic phenomenon includ merle-head and harl-head ("lite marked harl") puppies as well as the classic Pointer markings which is strictly a piebald as to phenotype. All however are genetic piebalds & so will breed like piebalds, not like normal merles & harlequins. And a piebald with the harlequin markings on the head is no more a "Harlequin" than a piebald is a Mantle: the "harl head" in fact shares more genes in common with the piebald pup than a normal harlequin, especially when considering the harl-headed piebald from a breeding standpoint. Anymore you can see two beautifully show-marked and even Champion parents producing litters where most of the puppies are mismarks (disqualified under the standard), as the piebald gene takes away 50% of the potential show marks in even these litters from parents with exceptional (and completely correct) color.

So it is a problem because having so many piebalds in the gene pool is robbing us all of show marks at the very least. Piebald is a simple Mendelian recessive. Breed two piebald carriers (white factored dogs) and one-in-four resulting puppies statisticaly will be some form of piebald (color-headed white), be it "pied," "harl head/lite-marked harl" or merle-head/merlikin. (This does not mean that you will ALWAYS see a piebald puppy result from two piebald carrying parents. It also doesn't mean that, by looking, it's always clear whether some of the lighter harlequins & even broken blanketed mantels are actually genetic piebalds). More importantly most of the normal marked dogs will actually be piebald carriers. (To read more about Mantles & their variations, their genetics, click here.) This means the breeder is only "a step away" from having two carriers meet & thereby end up producing piebalds. And that step for each of us gets smaller the more piebalds in the gene pool.


Loss of show color via the production of piebalds isn't the only problem of color piebald produces. In contrast to the steady, reliable pattern of white markings the Irish gene produces, often heavily marked mismarks also are born to litters involvingh piebalds/piebald carrier parents. So looking at the show marks, had the parent(s) no been piebald carrier(s), the breeder in question would have seen more show marks: the loss is first the 25% to outright piebald, then the heterozygotes too lightly or two heavily marked to be shown/preferred. And although too often suggested, breeding piebalds to to heavily marked dogs to get show marks is breeding a fault to a fault & not recommended. This is "robbing Peter to pay Paul": the show marks made from this will just make more piebalds--so the breeder is mortgaging their future (& that of their buyers) to get show marks now. (That is, the practice of breeding mismarked blacks to piebalds to get Mantles, or msimarked blacks to "lite marked harls" to get show marks, means that the resulting show marked offspring will produce the same problems of color found in the original parents. You are back where you started, no progress made. Not understanding this means often breeders feel color is uncontrollable where it is not. THE POINT HERE isn't to point fingers or throw the proverbial baby out with the bathwater, but to simply extend an appreciation of the laws of nature & genetics functionin here, to recognize this, restrict the use of such animals judiciously, and ideally help increase the irish gene, reduce the number of Danes carrying piebald. Practically that means avoiding ideally using piebalds and avoid breeding carriers to each other whenever possible, so as to move away from a gene that detracts from fully achieving the breed standard & help bring the breed's gene pool back to the main genes that produce the most correct markings in the Harlequin family over time.


Still unconvinced breeding outright piebalds brings mostly bad news? Here's a simple example of why this IS a problem for the breeder & the breed, using a piebald bitch as an example. She carries two doses of what is called excessive white or piebald (that makes her a piebald (mmss)). She is bred to a correctly marked Harlequin male. She produces from him 2 correctly marked harls, 2 correctly marked mantles, 2 boston-marked merles, a piebald like herself, and a "merlikin" (who is actually a merle piebald). Not a bad litter you say? Four show-marked pups to start with, for a harl litter, is really good. Here's the problem: *ALL* four of those pups are now white-factored. They may be show-marked, but they are carriers of white-factoring, and this has gone unrecorded. So they are sold and bred. Let's say they are all bred to other correctly marked, white-factored danes like themselves.

Now what happens? You lose show prospects each time you breed them & keep spreading white-factoring through the gene pool. White-factored to white-factored means 25% of the resulting pups will lack body color, & 2 of 3 correctly marked dogs will be "carriers" like themselves. And so on...and so on...and the genes for piebald are spread. Dogs are sold and bred, & people buy and then breed these piebald carriers unknowingly. Eventually one of these piebald carriers meets up with another piebald like the original bitch, or one of those nearly white harlequins who carries two doses of white-factoring, & then the resulting litter is mostly lacking in body color (i.e. is largely undermarked dogs), including some deaf pups, and, since they are all mostly white, the breeder cannot, by looking, sort out from looks what's what (i.e merlikins & harlequins, whites & piebalds all get mixed up). Even worse two "harls" meet, both are lightly marked, and are actually piebald harls, not true genetic harls. Then the whole litter is predominately white & you have no real show marks at all to show for it, plus a bunch of potentially deaf & blind pups. kay, you say, fine--I'll breed my piebald bitch to a Mantle--I _know_no deaf whites can come from that & I'll at least get mantles. Wrong. You _can_ get piebald & deaf pups if the Mantle you choose is white-factored (does he have splashy color, a break in the blanket?), and even if you do get well-marked Mantles they will *ALL* be white factored, so will be carriers of this same problem again.

These may be worse case scenarios, but here's a more typical one happening routinely now in the Harlequin gene pool (& a problem worldwide). Two nicely marked Danes are bred, maybe two Champions even. Maybe this is two Harlequins, or a Harlequin to a Mantle, or even two Mantles. Both dogs have beautiful markings and the hope is for a litter with the same. Instead mismarks predominate in the litter. There are mismarked blacks/mismarked mantles (with two little white to be correctly show marked at least for the USA). There are weirdly marked/heavily marked Harlequins and Mantles they would have to be near perfection to be showable. There are borderline Mantles & Harlequins also with too FEW markings--just a fews spots on the Harlequin, a very much "eaten up" & broken blanket on the Mantle, maybe such a wide blaze the head looks odd at various angles, or such assymetrical markings (like half a collar, or half a mask) that the dog is dubious for the ring. Compared to the predictable consistency of markings the Irish gene produces, piebald is a wild card--the joker in the pack. So it's important to track the piebald gene & promote the Irish gene to protect our Harlequin/Mantle gene pool.

There is just no way to get around it: breeding mismarks makes more mismarks & piebald is no exception. Sure, *you* can "get away with it" for a generation or two, but someone, somewhere, down the line will have the pay the price. The _breed_ pays the price. So, please! mark all pedigrees acturately: don't mis-register whites (MM) as harls (Mm), or piebalds (mm) as harls (Mm), & don't use piebalds (mmss) & lite-marked" (Mmss) piebald harls in your breeding program unknowingly.+ Confine the use of mismarks in a breeding program to circumstances of extreme duress & make them the exception, not the rule is the careful breeder's rule of thumb. And the same breeder tracks unwanted recessive genes, honestly knows & honestly says where they are and/or might be. Truly "Color Ethical" breeders don't play fast & loose with pedigrees, misidentify bloodstock, nor sell off mismarks routinely as breeding stock. There are far worse "sins" in the world of Harlequins than having a "fawn in the woodpile" & not dealing appropriately with the piebald gene is certainly one of them.

And to illustrate the issue here in concrete terms, below are two Mantle Danes, the first one a "pseudo-Irish" hybrid carrying the piebald (MITF SINE) allele, the second getting his Mantle coloring from another seperate ("true Irish") gene (i.e. he is not/not--SINE negative). Note the characteristic break in the blanket on the Mantle that is so typical of a piebald producer on the first Dane? The other Dane shown here cannot and will not produce white bodied (piebald) dogs as he is not carrying the gene, so will have a higher percentage of show marks over time & generation. Most interesting is also they are mother and son. The dog pup did not inherit his mother's piebald gene, but still is a show quality Mantle. See new information (2006-7) here. 

=================================

NOTE: There _was_some controversy over the existence of piebalds in the Great Dane breed. Although some experts such as Friedmar Krautwurst explicitly refer to the piebald as a reality of the genetic Dane inheritance, others such as Neil O'Sullivan felt these dogs are mutated harl/merle animals, with pigment patches isolated in areas of evolutionary importance. Breeders may also have been divided on this issue? However the genetic evidence is now clear that piebalism does exist. That the FCI recently allowed this predominately white dog to be shown in the Open Black class is as controversial as it is illogical. Many FCI countries have been laboring hard to reverse what they felt was a poor decision for the breed, one felt by many to be political, not rational, in nature. Recall in the FCI dogs that are not within the standard cannot even be registered, nevermind bred. So dogs have to be "showable" to be considered breed dogs under FCI, unlike the AKC/CKC situation here. And the way a standard is changed under FCI isn't through the democratic process of a member vote as it has to be in the AKC, nor is how often it can be changed restricted. Less than a handful of people in the breed's country of origin can change the standard at any point and even over the objections of the majority of countries and/or majority of breeders.

*Although COLORED HEADED WHITE fits the general description better & includes then harl & merle iterations of this gene's expression, strictly speaking piebald is not only a perfectly reasonable general appellation for this phenomenon in Danes, as the dogs in question result from being homozygous at the (SINE MITF) recessive mutation at the "Spotting" (MITF) locus. The color pattern in German is referred to as "PLATTENHUND," meaning "plate(or disc)-like" markings, to distinguish them from Manteltigeren (Mantledanes) & Tigerdoggen (Harlequins). This recessive white pattern, disqualified under the standard, would most likely be best translated as "piebald," given that "Tiger" in German refers to the Paint or "pinto" horse, & therefore "Tigerdogge" is loosely translated as Pinto-(German)-Mastiff. (Krautwurst has argued that "Harlequin" & "Tiger" are both bad appelations for what he called the "geflect" (patched, spotted or dappled) Great Dane.) It seems only reasonable to carry on this breed tradition & precisely seperate out Harlequins from piebalds, in that the standard itself does, & they _are_ genetically distinct. It is unfortunate that so much confusing inter-breed (& even intra-breed) terminology abounds for parti-colored, pinto, piebald, color-headed, white-bodied & white-factored animals, so it is necessary to specifically define one's terms. Here piebald is taken to mean the non-harlequin Black & White Dane that is more white than allowed under the Mantledane description--a spotted dane (the harlequin is technically patched, not spotted)--who is at least 50% white & is <mmss> in genotype, but can present as a "light marked harl", "broken-blanketed/half mask mantle," or "merlikin" (while not actually being any of these genotypes), as well as as "harl-head," "boston-head" & "merle-head" long recognized as a different genotype. All are actually piebalds.

+For those trying to navigate harldane pedigree space, best to get photos (ah-the day AKC requires photos with registrations!!!) of all the dogs you can. Beware dogs listed as "white with black markings," especially if these animals were bred to harls. Any dog who is so registered, if not a defective-white (<MM>, is most likely either a piebald (<mmss>, or a piebald harl (<Mmss>, & you'll find white-bodied dogs pop up for generations to come in such pedigrees, which means their well-marked siblings are likely white-factored, so will also produce piebald deaf, other defective whites, plus undermarked harls & piebald danes. Also any Harlequins, particularly non-Champion harls for whom one does not have accurate photos may be suspect, especially if there are numerous litely marked/mostly white dogs in the pedigree.


__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #429 

Staff X Bullmastiff cross

Pieds can easily be achieved through such crosses.
It's doubtful that the pieds we see today, although phenotypically comparable with the ancient pieds in old drawings, are in any way related genetically to those early types.

In all likelihood, the pieds we see at present, are the results of crosses used in the 20th century.


__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #430 

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
GinaG

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 3,433
Reply with quote  #431 
Mamma looks terribly thrilled to be in the picture ...LOL..she looks like she has had enough of that nursing thing..cute pups though.
Gina

__________________
gina anelli
Janine

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 1,524
Reply with quote  #432 
Even though I feel you are not worth my time Brindlelove, I must say I am not surprised by one quote in your last diatribe.
"You live for this crap".  Well, a bit of advice, get a life. 
You'll let the venom fly will you.  Why?  Is that really necessary?  This has been a great debate with many people expressing a different point of view, it has been civil and everyone except you (and me for that matter, for allowing you to get to me) have posted in a dignified manner.
You have contributed absolutely nothing to the thread.
Janine.
Teresa

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 4,137
Reply with quote  #433 
LOL Janine! You posted almost EXACTLY what I was going to say. Guys like him are usually compensated for "something". Who knows what it might be. But, my question to him would be 1.) what are you "compensating" for by being such a jerk, 2.) what do you think you are accomplishing debating by being a complete ass and 3.) what have YOU done to add anything to the breed? Being a jerk doesn't count as "adding" anything. If you had presented your case civilally, everyone would have been fine with you having your opinion. As for me, I've truly enjoyed the debate from all the others that have shared information, ideas and opinions. Thanks to everyone else for an educational thread.
__________________
http://www.oasismastiffs.com
http://www.mastiffchat.com
Align yourself with those with kind hearts, gentle spirits and honest intentions. Be a good friend and let good friends know how much they are valued! Live every day with the intention of doing what is right...
Gammonwood

Avatar / Picture

Gammonwood
Registered:
Posts: 256
Reply with quote  #434 

GO THE GIRLS!...LOL

 

Here is a summary I’ve done of some of the most current information we can find on dog coat colour genetics. Taken from

http://www.doggenetics.co.uk/index.htm   last updated on June 20 2012.

It’s a wonderful and easy to understand website that we was referred to by some Mastiff breeders in the US.

 

There are a few colour genes which can occasionally cause health problems in dogs, most notably merle but also High White.  High whites consist of a completely or predominantly white dog with just small amounts of colour on its head and sometimes base of tail. Small body patches may sometimes be present too. Sometimes the nose and eye rims are pink or partly pink, and the eyes may be blue in some breeds due to lack of pigment.  High or Extreme white can occasionally cause problems when it removes large amounts of pigment from the face and ears. The most common problem is deafness (due to lack of pigment in certain parts of the inner ear, which prevents it from functioning properly)

 

Mastiff Piedballs are not the same as High Whites, they have dark eyes, dark eye rims, black noses and mostly dark ear rims.

A homozygous (or "double") merle is one with two copies of the merle gene, and this severely impairs its ability to make pigment, leaving large areas of the dog pigmentless (white). Pigment is actually necessary for certain parts of the body to function correctly, so lack of pigment can cause health problems.
Dogs with large amounts of white caused by the homozygous piebald allele (
sp), such as Bull Terriers, Boxers and Dalmatians, can also have some of the same health problems as double merles.

So far all extreme white dogs that have undergone genetic testing have been shown to be homozygous for the piebald gene (spsp), just like the piebalds. However, there is a fairly large difference between these dogs, and it is possible there is something else going on to cause the high white. In breeds with both true irish spotting and piebald the high white may simply be caused by the interaction between homozygous irish spotting and homozygous piebald (e.g. the Sheltie). In other breeds the cause is less obvious and has led some people to postulate a further S allele - sw.

Jen

Crossroads

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 1,283
Reply with quote  #435 
Jen and Simon,

Thank you so much for posting pictures of your babies!  They are really lovely!!  I am in love with a couple of them whose pictures I will attach.  If they were mine I couldn't begin to part with either of them.  I was surprised to see the mixed coloring on the "solid" colored pups as well.  Such an interesting and amazing litter....so many opportunities to learn.  

Thank you for sending me the pedigree.  I am familiar with most of the dogs in it as I researched BISS Aust Ch Yangerdook the Bronx for a breeding several years ago.  He is on my short list of favorite dogs....what an awesome head...among other things!

I think you should box up the two puppies in the pictures and ship them on over to me!!  They are gorgeous!! 

Attached Images
Click image for larger version - Name: Fawn_Pied_Aug_6_2012_025.jpg, Views: 36, Size: 98.20 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: Brindle_Pied_July_30_2012_019.jpg, Views: 94, Size: 188.07 KB 

__________________
Jennifer Patterson


"Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American GI. One died for your soul, the other died for your freedom."

Janine

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 1,524
Reply with quote  #436 
Taken from Our Dogs Newspaper, I believe it to be in the 1930's.
(To the Editor of "Our Dogs")
Sir, - It was very interesting to me to read the letter published in your issue of March 10 from my quondam fellow breeder, Mr. C. Court Rice.  I cannot quite agree with him the Ch. Hotspur 18.509 was the most perfect headed Mastiff of his day.  Certainly I admit that he had a good head: but, in my opinion he was inclined to be puggy.  He was a big winner truly, but this is far from proving that his head was perfect.  Ethelred 38,766 (formerly Lyndhurst Bounce) I of course new very well, since I purchased him Mr. Rice.  His colour was not what I should call red - dark tawny might fit his description better.   In colour (perhaps a trifle darker), texture of coat, and dark shadings he much resembled Mr. Latchford,s Siward of Delaval, which is being exhibited today; but neither Mr. Rice, nor I, nor anybody else in the days of Ethelred had ever seen such reds as were common a few years ago.  When I judged at Richmond in 1927 after a considerable interval, and Prince and Duke appeared in the ring as Mastiffs, they gave me one of the shocks of my life;  I should certainly suspect that a generous flavour of St Bernard blood must have run in their veins, and those like them.
It is well known that Messrs. Inman and Walmsley used a Mastiff cross to improve their St. Bernards, and it is said that their experiment was very successful; but no cross made by Capt. Piddocke in July 1891, can possibly have accounted for any peculiarity there may have been in the colour of Ethelred.  He was bred by Mr. J. Beanland by Iron Duke 34,105, out of Vistala II 31,615, and was whelped in December, 1892.  Iron Duke, bred by Capt. Piddocke was by his Ch Ogilvie 29??? out of his Ch Jubilee Beauty 24,940.  Vistala II, bred by Mr Albert Andrews, was by Kaiser Frederick 27??? out of Lady Dora 27,145.  Moreover, both my Brampton Beauty 34,111, and Lord Clive 31,590 were very similar in colour to Ethelred, doubtless due to common inheritance:  Brampton Beauty was litter sister to Iron Duke, the father of Ethelred and Lord Clive (by Don Juan II 27,122 out of Zillah III.) was also bred by Capt. Piddocke, and was of his strain on both sides.  Ethelred certainly was coarse in coat, but he was a fine big strong dog.  He did a bit of winning, but nothing remarkable, and most of it when he was in poor company.  While he belonged to Mr. Rice he won 2nd Limit Dog and 3rd Open Dog at the Kennel Club Show in October 1894.  After he came to me he won 2nd Limit Dog and 3rd Open Dog at the Kennel Club Show in October, 1896, under W.K. Taunton, when Black Peter 1358a was 1st in Limit and 2nd in Open and Ch Mark Anthony 38,722 was first in Open.  Ethelred also won 1st Limit dog and 2nd Open Dog at Birmingham in December, 1896, under Dr. Sidney Turner, when there was a very poor entry, only 2 dogs in Limit Class, and Ch Peter Piper 38,775 got the only award in Open Dog.    The only other wins I can trace to his credit are 2nd Limit Dog and 3rd Open Dog under Mons. L. Dobbelmann at Northhampton, also in December 1896.  His value was getting strong and sound stock rather than for exhibition.  Of course, I quite agree with Mr. Rice's recollection that nearly all the dogs of our time were descended from Crown Prince or Beau. In my opinion Beau was the correct type an he proved the sire of a far better strain; and even Dr. Turner and Mr. Taunton were driven to admit in the end that Crown Prince was the cause of most of the trouble in the breed.  The same difference in type exist today, and I greatly dislike the heavy wrinkled head and the Pug foreface.
Many of the present day dogs are descended from red dogs like prince and Duke.  The colour of these came from a red bitch called Penkhill Lady, registered as a Bull-Mastiff:  I have strong suspicion that the colour and some of the characteristics of this strain were derived from a St Bernard origin, though, unfortunately, this does not seem to be susceptible of proof:  So it does not surprise me that Mr. Rice detects St. Bernard type in many of the Mastiffs of today, though I think we could still show him quite a number which he would admit to be near to the type of the famous old dogs whose names he quotes.  Yours, etc., W. Norman Higgs.
Janine

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 1,524
Reply with quote  #437 
Our Dogs February 5, 1932  Contributor Mr. F. J. Jawkings
The annual general meeting of the Old English Mastiff Club will be held at 5-30 p.m. on the first day of Cruft's Show, at 58 Upper Street, Islington.  All interested persons are invited to attend and enroll as members.
It is a pleasure to welcome a couple of new fanciers in the persons of Mr. W. Elson, of Chiswick, who has acquired an excellent dog puppy of the Deleval strain, and Mr. Herbert Barlow, of Kitt Green, near Wigan, who has become the owner of a puppy bred by Mr. Frank Jackson.
A slight error occurred in this column in or issue of Jan. 22, where it was stated that the late Mr. W.K. Taunton had written that "no Mastiff was free from this taint".  The actual words as used by Mr. Taunton, and which appeared in our issue of Dec. 5. 1919, over the nom de plume "Constable" were:-
We have an opinion that a cross with a St Bernard might have proved beneficial to the Mastiff at one time, provided a judicious selection of the St Bernard to be used for this purpose had been made and the result judiciously dealt with.  It is not possible to say whether any selection of the St Bernard was made in the case referred to, but I think we may safely say that the result was not judiciously dealt with, as there seems to be little doubt that the offsprin of the immediate cross were parted with and distributed throughout the country, and it is difficult to come across a Mastiff at the present without this taint".
It will be seen from the above that Mr. Taunton inferred that Mastiffs free from the St Bernard taint were difficult to find at that particular time, which is rather different from saying that there were no Mastiffs free from this taint.  F.J.H.
Mr. E. G. Oliver writes:- In your Mastiff Mems of Jan. 22 last Mr. Hawkings said "That the St Bernard cross exists seems clear beyond doubt, and it will be recalled that the late Mr. Taunton, writing in these columns in, I believe, 1923 (I quote from memory) stated that no Mastiff was free from this taint."  This statement requires correction, and, thanks to your courtesy in sending me a copy of Mr. Taunton's article, I am able to correct it.  This article in question was published on Dec 5, 1919, and was signed "Constable", Mr. Taunton's nom de plume.  The St Bernard cross he refers to is clearly the one conjectured to have been made by Mr Price in 1904, which produced Cleavland Leopold and Cleveland Monarch.  Mr Taunton makes it clear that he believed that such a cross did take place, and after expressing doubt of its advisability, he says that "the result was not judiciously dealt with, as there seems to be little doubt that the offspring of the immediate cross were parted with and distributed throughout the country, and it is difficult to come across a Mastiff at the present without this taint in the blood".  The article was written just after the war when very few Mastiffs were to be seen; only 17 of both sexes appear in the Stud Book for 1921.  It is, moreover, not difficult to think of several living at the time which were entirely free from this blood.  For instance, all Colonel Z. Walker's dogs, Collyhurst Squire and Jessica, both of whom appear in many pedigrees of today.  The cross in question took place 29 years ago, and is about 10 generations removed from the dogs that are being shown today.  Personally, I am satisfied that it is now bred out.  I am obliged to Mr. Hawkings for giving us particulars of his other in-bred litter.  In this connection I should like to say, after dilligent inquiry, I have never heard of fawns producing a brindle, though two brindles may not infrequently produce a fawn:.
Janine

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 1,524
Reply with quote  #438 
Our Dogs  June 24, 1932  Contributor:  Mr F. J. Hawkings

In the standard description of the Mastiff nothing is said about dew-claws.  These appendages appear on Mastiff puppies as they do one other breeds, and breeders who object to them remove them when the puppies are four days old.  A correspondent recently commented on the fact that an eight month old puppy he had purchased had dew-claws on all four quarters - a fact to which to took very strong exception.  In the writer's experience about half the puppies born have dew-claws on the hind quarters.  He is prejudiced against the mutilation of puppies, but in deference to popular taste removes dew-claws when they occur on the hind legs, and leaves the front ones alone.  A perusal of old literature reveals that many Mastiffs of 60 or 70 years ago which were at the top of the tree exhibited this propensity of exhibiting an extra toe, often not a dew-claw at all, but an integral part of the foot.  This was a point to which the late Captain Garnier paid particular attention when selecting from a litter those puppies he wished to keep for himself.  So far as my own experiments in breeding extend, I have noticed that the fifth toe seems to be confined to the most massive and virile members of the litter.  I have only bred two puppies on which it has been an integral portion of the foot, and I have always regretted the fact that they both died at an early age as the result of accidents-one at three days and the other at 15 days.  These fact are doubtless reconcilable with the theory that the Mastiff and the St Bernard had a common origin.  F.J.H.
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #439 
Quote:
The St Bernard cross he refers to is clearly the one conjectured to have been made by Mr Price in 1904, which produced Cleavland Leopold and Cleveland Monarch.


Lady Marton being the alleged smooth coated Saint behind the Cleveland dogs mentioned. Many anecdotal stories regarding crosses were difficult to prove, since these things were rarely discussed and validation was scant.

Some die-hard fanciers would rather ignore such assertions and trust the pedigrees presented. Many kennel operators had poor facilities and controls, so a cross should not have been seen as unthinkable, under early 20th century kennel conditions. It might be unthinkable to believe such crosses never happened!

But even if 100% proof of such crosses were unobtainable, we still have the pieds, fluffs, and Bull influences in the Mastiff, to remind us that something is/was afoot!

 There has been statistical evidence, testimonial evidence, anecdotal evidence and analogical evidence, which can represent enough support to confirm a belief, or supposition related to crosses that have occurred. Therefore, I'm convinced that crosses took place and have little doubt, that the anomalies we see in Mastiffs today, were simply due to mutations, or ancient genetic remnants of purity, stemming from a more homogeneous earlier Mastiff type.

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
Janine

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 1,524
Reply with quote  #440 
Our Dogs  October 20, 1933  Contributor  Mr W. Norman Higgs.
There has been much discussion recently on the colour of Mastiffs (not Old English Mastiffs please, there is no such breed).  To my mind this is a waste of time; both the existing clubs have agreed that the correct colour is as stated in the standard of points.  Consequently, anything else is incorrect.  It is generally speculated that at some time or other there has been an outcross with another breed or breeds.  Since that is established as fact, why waste time endeavouring to prove who the guilty party, or parties are? I suggest that, to get a little more unanimity, breeders all adopt the slogan, "Breed out the cross".  If those with animals showing the cross (and there is no doubt whatever that colour is a sure sign of purity in a breed) would accent this slogan and breed out instead of constantly mating together and thus, by inbreeding, more firmly establishing the faults, we should soon see satisfactory results.  Anyway, until something like is done I do not see any hope of all pulling together to obtain one result.  viz., the perfect Mastiff or as nearly perfect as possible perhaps it would be better to say once again "breed out the cross".
More reds sprung from Penkhull Lady than from all other sources.  She was grand-dam of Jersey Queen and dam of Prince and Duke, who have each sired numbers of red progeny.  Clayton Betty was dam of Jersey Queen and a red, Jersey Lion, sire of Prince and Duke, was fawn, but being a son of Penkhull Lady may have had recessive red in him.  Penkhull Lady's sire and dame are both described in the Kennel Club records as bull-mastiffs.  Mention has been made of Mr. Price and a doubt raised as to the purity of Cleveland Leopold's pedigree.  Mr Price died five years after Cleveland Leopold was born.  Why was not the pedigree challenged then?  W.N.H.
Grant

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 890
Reply with quote  #441 
http://www.dogbreedinfo.com/s/saintbermastiff.htm
__________________
Grant
Janine

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 1,524
Reply with quote  #442 
To the Editor of "Our Dogs"  I think this is Nov 1933.

Sir - In reply to your correspondence in your issue of October 27, I am not confused with what the late Mr Price admitted to me at Edinburgh Show, October 1906, in the presence of the late Mr. Thomas Gardiner, of Haslemere Kennel, Bucks., and Mr A W Golde (?) a Scottish Mastiff fancier.  I want to say I had, and still have the highest faith in the late Mr Geo. Cook and Mr. W S. Clark, also Mr. Sam Crabtree.  I hope Mr Crabtree and Mr Bennett will take m comments in a friendly spirit.  We will admit as stated by the aforesaid gentlemen, Lady Marton and Princess Marton were both light fawns, fine-coated bitches, Before passing over from the kennel of Mr. Cook to Mr. Price, Princess Marton, born April 1, 1887 was mother of a large family, many of them bitches, but how many died at birth I do not know.  One of her early family was the late Mr. Crabtree's Beauty Marton by Prince Bampton,  which was born on October 1, 1898.  Mr Geo Cook also bred ??? Marton and Lady Lulu, the latter bought by Mr Elliott.  They were born on May 31 1899.  What we might ask is:  Were there two Princess Marton's?  I can produce the details.  Cleveland Leopold (shown at Edinburgh in October 1906) was a deep red dog, born in April 1901.  It is possible that Princess Marton was breeding pups for 16 years, or 17 years after her birth?  If so, she must have been a wonderful bitch! - Yours etc., John Edgar Allen.
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #443 
Grant, the color in the image (Saint/Mastiff) from the site you've provided, was perfectly acceptable to Wynn, but other venerated fanciers felt otherwise!

The final standard regarding color, was formed by those who thought....otherwise!

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
Janine

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 1,524
Reply with quote  #444 
Note, the one above my Norman Higgs should have been Dog World, not Our Dogs.
This is Dog World again, in response to the letter by Mr. Higgs.

As a Mastiff breeder and exhibitor of over thirty years one cannot help but think what a waste of time it is saying so much about the colours of the Mastiffs.  Any breeder knows very well that the correct Mastiff colours should be either brindle or fawn, and I quite agree with Mr. w. Norman Higgs' letter.  Why waste all this time when the correct thing to do is to breed out the cross?  When this is done an the O.E.M. Club regognises that there are only two colours for the Mastiffs - brindle and fawn - it will be for the better for the breed.
Today, when one goes to a show, one sees two or three different different types, which is most confusing to a person wishing to take up Mastiffs.  What we want to look to is the future, not years gone by, trying to find what was the cause of the reds, which any Mastiff breeder knows, and as soon as the true type and colours of the Mastiffs are bred to, the sooner this grand old breed will come to the front.  N. Walker Hall.
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #445 
Color is cosmetic.

Cosmetics, have an effect on aesthetics.

Aesthetics, are defined by the pleasing of appearance.

The pleasing of appearance, is a variable!

Therefore, a pied, may, or may not, be pleasing to the fancy!

Since there is no quantitative axiom to base a pro, or con, it's a matter of conjecture!

Since conjecture, is the formation, or expression of an opinion or theory, without sufficient evidence for proof.

It's pure speculation, as to the outcome.

So, I vote for Ben & Jerry's Rocky Road!

What say you!

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
Grant

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 890
Reply with quote  #446 
What say you about your thoughts a few years ago ?
01/06/07

The argument of "cosmetic doesn't count" is always made to justify the unjustifiable!

 

Cosmetic imperfections affects type and type is after all, what separates breed from breed!

 

Minor cosmetic faults are easily tolerated ( e.g. hair reversals, lighter pigment, toenail color, etc.), but when the DEGREE of those mentioned cosmetic issues intensify to the limit, then a different value is placed on their respective flaws.

 

It says so in the standard!

 


__________________
Grant
Grant

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 890
Reply with quote  #447 
Another interesting post, from 01/06/07

When sherman is long gone, he will be just another name on a pedigree!

 

The two dogs that came together and clicked which produced Sherman, would not be there and those genes would be mixed back into the pool once again, with people trying to linebreed Sherman back into existence.

 

The bottom line, is that the fluff gene gets passed on!   If you need to breed to a fluff, despite the 5000 non fluff mastiffs out there, just to bring in some "quality" that you personally deem worthy, the long term affect is not worth the short term perk!

 

"If not for the fluff we wouldn't have Sherman", is like saying, if not for the many cross breedings we wouldn't have mastiffs!

 

Anyone willing to cross breed "today"? If not, then lets not be willing to cross "type" faults either!

 


__________________
Grant
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #448 
Quote:
What say you about your thoughts a few years ago ?


It remains the same!

The issue is threefold.

(i) Can the gene be contained? (through testing etc.)

(ii) Does the present anomaly distort type, beyond any historical equivalent?

(iii) Will the inclusion of an anomaly harm the breed aesthetic?

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #449 
As far as Sherman goes, the same holds true as in the pied.

With the advent of a test for carriers of the long hair, we can now control the fluff gene.

I still hold other reservations regarding mixing genetic anomalies into the gene pool, but my resistance is certainly lowered, with the advent of genetic screening for such traits!


__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
Grant

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 890
Reply with quote  #450 
Steve
There are many test's available to breeders, and has been for a while now !
The disease tests, if not done, can be of great cost to the breeder and the breed !! And still, few test !!!
Cosmetic faults will only be tested for, by the breeders that will not tolerate these traits, and the rest will breed with careless abandon, because they do not see the harm, or actually want to see the outcome !!! 
 

__________________
Grant
Print
Reply

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.