Now that there's a FC/AFC Black Shorthair...

[Ayres]

and not looking at the history and betterment of the breed at all.

Steven, Would you please expand upon what you perceive as the betterment of the breed? Please specifically address how in your mind the color black is required to improve the breed in a different and better manner than an existing standard color.

Certainly. I perceive looking toward the betterment of the breed as breeding the best dogs to the best dogs. What is considered "best" is highly subjective, admittedly, but there is no doubt that there are black GSPs that are being underutilized in breed programs simply because, at the moment, black is a DQ color in the show ring. Further, to be perfectly clear, I never once stated that black is required to improve the breed. (Don't go twisting my words.) But the total banishment of the color in the show ring isn't doing the breed any favors, especially when a liver littermate or offspring can show without question.

However, I never "called you out" and I see no reason to "have at it".

I would submit this is inaccurate. When you needlessly named names at the beginning of your post the common man's perception was different than if you had not mentioned any names.

Well it's interesting to see that you believe Ted and yourself to be the "common man" to the exclusion of me, who made the original post. When I named names, it was in a specific response to Dave Quindt's assertion that he had "never once heard this argument. Never once." What I did was to cite the argument, specifically by post, and then include two additional names of people who agreed with the argument to prove that it wasn't just one guy spouting off. To prove my point, naming names wasn't a needless act. In my opinion it was completely necessary to prove my point and counter Dave's assertion. I'm not going to apologize for citing past posts. If you're "man enough" to post it once you should either be willing enough to stand by it or convinced enough to admit a change of heart.

In my opinion, making the argument that DK breeders stand to profit more from the inclusion of black in the American breed standard is purely self-centered, politically and economically

In your opinion, do you claim the current owners and breeders of black dogs want recognition of black totally exclusive of any self-interest or economics, but purely for altruistic reasons?

"In my opinion", as an owner of a solid black GSP, I would like to be able to compete with him in the show ring. As a close friend of a breeder of black GSPs, I know that there is skepticism of including black in the American breed standard due to the inevitable temporary fad, though ultimately still a desire to see black inclusion and open competition in the show ring. I do believe that there are those out there who see including black in the standard as a way to make more money, and I don't agree with those people just the same as I don't agree with the people who want black to be a DQ due to money reasons. It would be naive to claim that everyone on one side of an argument has the same motives for the end result, or that even with different motives they will all agree. But the simple fact is that, regardless of my opinion, economics drives politics; and until you can 1) get more people to look past the economics and into the opportunity for better breeding practices or 2) make the situation a winning situation, economically, for 2/3rds of the membership, the black inclusion in the American breed standard isn't going to pass.

Please comment on how in your opinion a future implementation date would be inequitable to all GSP breeders taken as a whole.

I just don't think it is necessary, or, rather, should be necessary. I believe that when you're discussing a change in the breed standard that the topic of what is "equitable for the breeders" should take a back seat to what would be better for the breed (see above). A future implementation date would only legitimize the fact that people are voting primarily for their pocketbooks and not for the dogs. That said, if it takes a future implementation date of a breed standard change to get the change to pass, I wouldn't be against it.


Now that I've answered all of your questions, would you be so kind as to do the same?

[vzkennels]

Art your thoughts on the show ring is exactly right.White & LVR as been a standard for how long? Look up how many Wht Ch or even Solid Lvr Ch it don't compare to the Roans so the roans are the best right? SURE!
They cry about bias at Field trials wait till they hit the show ring you have one judge not 2 to atleast have a discussion about the winner.
I have never shown & GSP & have no desire to but have been to hundreds of shows.
We use to breed & show Dobes one of the most competitive breeds at shows.You are almost wasting your time with out a pro handler.
There are 4 allowable colors & has been since I can remember just look up how many Blue & Fawn CH there are.

[Ayres]

Thanks Mark that's exactly how I felt when he used my name,but because he is a moderator it's ok.
I was admonished for using a persons name because I believed he was unethical & explained why just to have it all deleted.

Ted, did you not agree with John Lunseth in the thread that I cited? It's not ok to cite posts because I'm a moderator, it's simply ok for anyone to do it. I'm not privy to the situation where you had a post deleted, but from your own explanation it seems it was deleted due to your content and not due to the fact that you cited a post.

I never said the lack of a Black FC was the only reason for it not passing,there are many in my eyes & the actual color not even on the charts.

I never once said that was the only reason you cited. But you did cite it as a reason, and Dave said he had never heard that argument.

[vzkennels]

Ayers I was admonished for using his name told if I had left his name out it would have been fine but I'm not a mod & don't want to be.

[Ayres]

Were you citing a post he made, or just simply explaining why you thought he was unethical? You can see a difference, can't you? I never once gave my opinion of you (heck, I don't know you outside this forum), I simply cited a post you had made. Do you really think there's something wrong with that in light of my explanation why I cited three names?

[Greg Jennings]

Keep on discussing. Just hit a link for our sponsors for every heated post you make or respond to...

[Ayres]

That's the spirit, Greg!

[vzkennels]

Greg Ayers started this thread knowing exactly where it would lead to.Honestly I could care less if it passes or not but believe it will in time.Untill then they have to play by the rules.
Regardless I WILL NEVER VOTE FOR IT & the more of this BS I see only makes me that much more adamant about it

[Ayres]

Honestly I could care less if it passes or not but believe it will in time.

I'm a little more pessimistic.

Until then they have to play by the rules.

Meaning, black GSPs can do anything and everything their liver counterparts can do, except show in AKC conformation shows.

Regardless I WILL NEVER VOTE FOR IT

So what's the reason now? If us proponents of black GSPs are ever to have a fair shake at changing the minds of the GSPCA membership, we have to be able to address specific concerns.

That being said, I do realize that some people will never change their minds, and everyone else should realize that too. Arguing and debating a subject is usually very unlikely to change the mind of the person involved in the debate. I don't expect to change Ted's mind here, just as much as I don't expect my mind to change based upon his arguments. We're just going to end up disagreeing. Keeping that in mind should help to alleviate the temper flares, and keep the discussion civil.

[snips]

I cannot believe black is not passed because they are not yet getting it done in the field :roll: Or I cannot believe black is not passed because they will go downhill in the show ring :roll: :roll: It is not passed because of ignorance IMO. If black is accepted in Germany and by AKC, how dumb is it that the Parent Club will not allow it in show? Black would have as hard a time placing in show as would liver and white, IMO...We have a white DC and are fixing to try for another, so I know it is tough. But, at least we CAN!!!!!!

[Ridge-Point]

Show breeders HAVE ruined the red setter, the AKC pointer, German Shepherd, and caused a huge separation between the dogs they breed and and actual functional working dogs in numerous other breeds.

Actually that is not true. They have created a line of dogs that serves their own purpose. In everyone of those breeds there is a working version and a show version. Noone buys an AKC show pointer to hunt with, but if someone wants to own one then you have no right to say they can't. If there was a market for a hunting quality Red Setter then there would be a hunting quality Red Setter. The breed is over 200 years old, someone stopped breeding a dog along the way that performed well in the field. How is that the fault of someone breeding a dog to compete in the show ring?

White & LVR as been a standard for how long? Look up how many Wht Ch or even Solid Lvr Ch it don't compare to the Roans so the roans are the best right? SURE!

HOF CH NMK's Placer Country Snowbird produced field champions, show champions, Duel champions, and the top all time winningest show dog in breed history (who was a reverse ticked almost white dog). There are many White and Liver dogs that are show champions and there always has been.

[BigShooter]

and not looking at the history and betterment of the breed at all.

Steven, Would you please expand upon what you perceive as the betterment of the breed? Please specifically address how in your mind the color black is required to improve the breed in a different and better manner than an existing standard color.

Certainly. I perceive looking toward the betterment of the breed as breeding the best dogs to the best dogs. What is considered "best" is highly subjective, admittedly, but there is no doubt that there are black GSPs that are being underutilized in breed programs simply because, at the moment, black is a DQ color in the show ring. Further, to be perfectly clear, I never once stated that black is required to improve the breed. (Don't go twisting my words.) But the total banishment of the color in the show ring isn't doing the breed any favors, especially when a liver littermate or offspring can show without question.

I will politely disagree, if the assertion is "you are not looking at the betterment of the breed" the admonishment is that you are "required" to look at the black dogs for betterment of the breed.

However, I never "called you out" and I see no reason to "have at it".

I would submit this is inaccurate. When you needlessly named names at the beginning of your post the common man's perception was different than if you had not mentioned any names.

Well it's interesting to see that you believe Ted and yourself to be the "common man" to the exclusion of me, who made the original post. When I named names, it was in a specific response to Dave Quindt's assertion that he had "never once heard this argument. Never once." What I did was to cite the argument, specifically by post, and then include two additional names of people who agreed with the argument to prove that it wasn't just one guy spouting off. To prove my point, naming names wasn't a needless act. In my opinion it was completely necessary to prove my point and counter Dave's assertion. I'm not going to apologize for citing past posts. If you're "man enough" to post it once you should either be willing enough to stand by it or convinced enough to admit a change of heart.

In this case the common man are the many evaluating their perception of the intent of your statement. The subsequent reaction may not have been anticipated by you but that does not change the perception of your intent. I certainly accept your explanation and presume you are capable of understanding how it was perceived by others.

"Man enough" is used as a name calling challenge for baiting another individual. Somewhat beneath you and certainly unneccessary from one who is also a moderator.

In my opinion, making the argument that DK breeders stand to profit more from the inclusion of black in the American breed standard is purely self-centered, politically and economically

In your opinion, do you claim the current owners and breeders of black dogs want recognition of black totally exclusive of any self-interest or economics, but purely for altruistic reasons?

"In my opinion", as an owner of a solid black GSP, I would like to be able to compete with him in the show ring. As a close friend of a breeder of black GSPs, I know that there is skepticism of including black in the American breed standard due to the inevitable temporary fad, though ultimately still a desire to see black inclusion and open competition in the show ring. I do believe that there are those out there who see including black in the standard as a way to make more money, and I don't agree with those people just the same as I don't agree with the people who want black to be a DQ due to money reasons. It would be naive to claim that everyone on one side of an argument has the same motives for the end result, or that even with different motives they will all agree. But the simple fact is that, regardless of my opinion, economics drives politics; and until you can 1) get more people to look past the economics and into the opportunity for better breeding practices or 2) make the situation a winning situation, economically, for 2/3rds of the membership, the black inclusion in the American breed standard isn't going to pass.

Please comment on how in your opinion a future implementation date would be inequitable to all GSP breeders taken as a whole.

I just don't think it is necessary, or, rather, should be necessary. I believe that when you're discussing a change in the breed standard that the topic of what is "equitable for the breeders" should take a back seat to what would be better for the breed (see above). A future implementation date would only legitimize the fact that people are voting primarily for their pocketbooks and not for the dogs. That said, if it takes a future implementation date of a breed standard change to get the change to pass, I wouldn't be against it.


Now that I've answered all of your questions, would you be so kind as to do the same?

I'm sorry, which specific questions did you ask of me?

[Ken Lynch]

I am not sure how the voting on the standard change went on the earlier votes. However, on the last vote, for those that voted, greater than 2/3rds were in favor. I believe that the number of members voting was the highest anyone could remember. But because the number of votes was near but not 2/3rds of the eligible membership it failed. I would venture a guess that those who have expressed their opinions here cast their ballots. My guess is that those that did not vote held no strong opinions either for or against. How does one go about getting someone to go out of their way (vote) for something they have no interest in?

Yes liver and white is part of the standard along with solid liver. Yes the number of liver and white or solid liver bench champions is small. But the set of liver and white along with solid liver is a small subset of the total GSP population. I cannot speak to weather the number of champions in this set is statistically consistent when compared to the total GSP champion population. I understand that some with dogs in this set choose not to fight the fight. There are also some who have fought the fight but choose to no longer fight. Yet there are some in this set that have chosen to fight and actually have won. I do not understand why some people deliberately take a position that prevents someone else from making a choice to fight the fight.

[vzkennels]

So after the Blacks get voted in then the people that breed the GSPS marked liked Dobes or Gelber brands will want the same privladges after all the FCI allows them .And if you think people aren't going to breed them & ask more because they are a rare color you have your head in the sand.Oh no that will never happen yeah what ever.Why don't we just do away with the standard anyway & go the same right as the pointers.That's what all American GSPS are anyway!!

[Dave Quindt]

Can it be peer pressure from the field trial world has oppressed the black GSP?
adogslife

In 2002 a B&W GSP placed in the national field futurity. It was a non-event on the grounds; no one other than the owner really cared that it was a b&d dog. I know, because I was there and rode the brace.

It was commonly accepted that the placing dog was the first black GSP to ever run in a national field trial stake. An event with almost 50 years of history.

The first dog to ever have run places in a national event and you are claiming some sort of FT oppression?

[Ridge-Point]

So after the Blacks get voted in then the people that breed the GSPS marked liked Dobes or Gelber brands will want the same privladges after all the FCI allows them .And if you think people aren't going to breed them & ask more because they are a rare color you have your head in the sand.Oh no that will never happen yeah what ever.Why don't we just do away with the standard anyway & go the same right as the pointers.That's what all American GSPS are anyway!!

If someone bred purple GSP's how would that effect you and your dogs in any way? More competition? Let me guess, you want to sell your dogs to buyers that look for fad colors and fad breeds? Man you are really missing out there. The argument holds no water, if these colors are allowed in the FCI standard then why don't you ever see them?

[adogslife]

almost 50 years history....

how many black/white dogs hold FT titles, how many b/w dogs are on the pros strings? how encouraged are owners of b/w dogs to enter FTs? how many breeders of FT dogs breed to b/w? how biased are FT judges?

If the color (not the lines) needs to be proven to earn it's place then b/w owners better get on the bandwagon and enter FTs. I am guessing there are more MH titled b/w then FCs and AFC? Since the show crowd doesn't have an interest in them then that means they are bred more for hunt? Why are the entry numbers not as high in FTs?

[snips]

Why are the entry numbers not as high in FTs?[/quote]

This is what I observe from mainline FTers. They are kinda like the NAVHDA bunch...For the most part, they look to certain bloodlines for their FT dogs and NAVHDA dogs...This pretty much excludes any of the lines you will get black from at this point. NAVHDA people do not even look at anything that is not Sharp Shooter or Shooting Star...

[Ayres]

I will politely disagree, if the assertion is "you are not looking at the betterment of the breed" the admonishment is that you are "required" to look at the black dogs for betterment of the breed.

No, you've made an incorrect assumption. The assertion being "you are required to look to the betterment of the breed", the admonishment is that you are required to overlook your personal economic impact and the potential economic gain of others. You have to look at the context of the previous postings and not just lift certain phrases to suit your argument. As I explained, what is "best" is highly subjective. But as it stands now, there are a number of people who are overlooking black dogs that may be a better choice in a specific breeding than a liver counterpart. That's not to say that the inclusion of a black line is required in every breeding to make it better. But if you cut out part of the options for breeding due to the American breed standard, you're doing a disservice in my opinion.

In this case the common man are the many evaluating their perception of the intent of your statement.

Meaning, you have identified the "common man" to be you and Ted, to the exclusion of me, the original poster, and anyone else who may have read the statement who did not share your viewpoint.

The subsequent reaction may not have been anticipated by you but that does not change the perception of your intent. I certainly accept your explanation and presume you are capable of understanding how it was perceived by others.

I can understand that it may have been perceived incorrectly by others, especially if it was read over quickly and without the context of being a response to Dave's prior post. Thank you for accepting my explanation of how it was never intended to be a "calling out." (Especially since the actual quote was from a post made by John 'Wagonmaster' Lunseth and not Ted)

"Man enough" is used as a name calling challenge for baiting another individual. Somewhat beneath you and certainly unnecessary from one who is also a moderator.

I put the phrase "man enough" in quotes partly as a tongue-in-cheek phrase and partly because I couldn't come up with a better way of explaining it. Where I come from if you do or say something you're expected to own up to it, and if your stance has since changed (which is anyone's prerogative) you're expected to own up to that as well. It certainly wasn't name calling. If you incorrectly perceived it to be a challenge or a bait of some kind, which wasn't intended at all, please accept this explanation instead. I certainly wouldn't want to see a personal challenge or a bait of another individual coming from any member, moderator or not.

I'm sorry, which specific questions did you ask of me?

The same you asked of me, but in reverse. Let's see here...
1) What is the betterment of the breed to you? And why do you believe that the exclusion of black colored GSPs is required for the betterment of the breed, or why do you believe that the inclusion of blacks is not necessary to provide the best options?
2) In your opinion, do you claim the current detractors of black dogs want the disqualification of black totally exclusive of any self-interest or economics, but purely for altruistic reasons?
3) Please comment on how in your opinion a future implementation date would be equitable to all GSP breeders taken as a whole, and why or whether such equity is needed for GSP breeders when considering the betterment of the breed as the primary reason for the inclusion or exclusion of the black color.

[dan v]

If there was a market for a hunting quality Red Setter then there would be a hunting quality Red Setter. The breed is over 200 years old, someone stopped breeding a dog along the way that performed well in the field. How is that the fault of someone breeding a dog to compete in the show ring?

Just a small note, and then back to the show. Please, please, please don't confuse a Red Setter with an AKC Irish Setter...they are not the same dog.

[Adam]

Ok like I've said before in previous posts I could careless if black gets accepted or doesn't.

What I want to know is what do black dogs bring to the table to better the breed that you can't find in a liver dog? AKC people have been breeding GSP's for 70+ years without black and obviously have done a pretty good job or I don't think any of us would own one right now so why the urge the past 10-15 years black accepted and PLEASE do not bring up the its accepted in germany nonsense if you want to worry about the german standard then get a german dog...

[Greg Jennings]

Are you guys visiting the sponsors' web sites when you post or respond to something heated?

[ezzy333]

If there was a market for a hunting quality Red Setter then there would be a hunting quality Red Setter. The breed is over 200 years old, someone stopped breeding a dog along the way that performed well in the field. How is that the fault of someone breeding a dog to compete in the show ring?

Just a small note, and then back to the show. Please, please, please don't confuse a Red Setter with an AKC Irish Setter...they are not the same dog.

I wanted to say that too but didn't want to get involved in this one when I don't have a Irish. Red setters are a recent breed created in the AF sud book by crossing the Irish and English. And truth be known the Irish was bred for the solid red color before they ever got to this country. That dates back again to Ireland. Admittedly it continued after getting here but it didn't start here with the dreaded show breeders.

Ezzy

[adogslife]

Adam,
maybe,just maybe the l/w's littermate who happens to be black is a better choice for a breeding - oh but too bad - it's black.

It can not be ignored that littermates and parents are allowed to enter shows when the black sheep is denied entry.

What I am hearing is that there is no black dog as good or better then a l/w or liver. How on earth can that be?

[Adam]

Adam,

It can not be ignored that littermates and parents are allowed to enter shows when the black sheep is denied entry.

Had people bred to the standard from the get go we wouldn't be having this discussion at all now would we? I'm not saying there is not a black dog out there as good as the liver dogs I'm saying that there are liver dogs out there producing everything that the black dogs can except the color so what is the real reason for breeding blacks?

[Ayres]

What I want to know is what do black dogs bring to the table to better the breed that you can't find in a liver dog?

You're never going to find a general answer to this question. You always have to look at it on a case-by-case, specific basis. Certainly Wind River's Black Magic MH (#1 Hunt Test Producing Dam 2002 & 2005) had something to bring to the table, and I know you know of that solid black shorthair and her progeny.

AKC people have been breeding GSP's for 70+ years without black and obviously have done a pretty good job or I don't think any of us would own one right now so why the urge the past 10-15 years black accepted and PLEASE do not bring up the its accepted in germany nonsense if you want to worry about the german standard then get a german dog...

Have you read the breed history to know how the first GSPs came to North America, how the original breed standard was petitioned and set, and how and when the first black GSPs were available in North America? Here's a link to a reprint of an October 2007 Shorthair Journal article by Patte Titus: The Black GSP - History and Origin. Note that the black inclusion into the ancestry of the GSP predates the breed standard in the AKC and the formation of the GSPCA, which controls the AKC breed standard.

This is a German dog at its roots, like it or not. People have been breeding black GSPs in North America since they became available as well, and just like the liver-only breeders, some have been doing a pretty good job otherwise there would be no black lines at all in the U.S. So why the push against adding the black coat into the breed standard? And PLEASE do not bring up that "it wasn't included in the original breed standard for some reason nobody really knows, but we all accept" nonsense.

[Ridge-Point]

If there was a market for a hunting quality Red Setter then there would be a hunting quality Red Setter. The breed is over 200 years old, someone stopped breeding a dog along the way that performed well in the field. How is that the fault of someone breeding a dog to compete in the show ring?

Just a small note, and then back to the show. Please, please, please don't confuse a Red Setter with an AKC Irish Setter...they are not the same dog.

I wanted to say that too but didn't want to get involved in this one when I don't have a Irish. Red setters are a recent breed created in the AF sud book by crossing the Irish and English. And truth be known the Irish was bred for the solid red color before they ever got to this country. That dates back again to Ireland. Admittedly it continued after getting here but it didn't start here with the dreaded show breeders.

Ezzy

Yes but, the Irish Setter was bred to be a gun dog. At some point that gundog ceased to exist and there were only show dogs remaining. Was the Red Setter not created to fill this void?

Ok like I've said before in previous posts I could careless if black gets accepted or doesn't.

What I want to know is what do black dogs bring to the table to better the breed that you can't find in a liver dog? AKC people have been breeding GSP's for 70+ years without black and obviously have done a pretty good job or I don't think any of us would own one right now so why the urge the past 10-15 years black accepted and PLEASE do not bring up the its accepted in germany nonsense if you want to worry about the german standard then get a german dog...

Look at your own dogs pedigree. Do some breed research, some of the most succesfull dogs in breed history came from german lines being crossed with american lines. One breeding that really pops out, when looking at pedigrees on this sight, is Hustler/Wendy vom Enzstrand(Wendy was half German). Let me change your question around. How does restricting dogs from competition based on coat color(which is common and accepted in worldwide standards) imrove the breed? Especially when you are already using those same lines to improve the breed.

[vzkennels]

You guys all crack me up. Do any of you remember the pup that is marked like a Dobe,he had littermates that were the normal color so why should they be allowed to show & not him.Blew that idea out of the water.That can be said of any fault when there are bad bites or over size or under size in the litter there are some that are usually correct so the argument you are stating holds no water.
You know the DK people down the so called American GSPS every chance they get,they are all pointers,they don't hunt fur,ect & ect.
When they show some respect & quit telling everyone how superior they are to the AKC GSPS which when their DKS don't or can't pass the test to become DKS then they become GSPS.
When they all become GSPS then I will respect them.The thing is none of these dogs no what color they are it's only the people.
Now you all know what I think about it so I have nothing else to say on the subject.

[Adam]

My bitch is out of an american x german breeding both parents being liver so explain the relevance of the hustler/wendy breeding when it comes to black?

I'm not saying restricting black improves the breed what I am saying is people have been successfully breeding/showing liver dogs in this country for 70+ years without black being accepted so why now all of a sudden is there an urge to get it accepted in the show ring?

Ayres I know all about debbi's dogs and have no problem with them like I said I'm not against it all I'm doing is asking questions. I've read/skimmed that article numerous times but still can't seem to find where it says that people started using black dogs american breeding programs..

[BigShooter]

But as it stands now, there are a number of people who are overlooking black dogs that may be a better choice in a specific breeding than a liver counterpart.

Is this opinion or fact? One can say with impunity that any number of other people overlooked some other dog that may be a better (or worse) choice in any specific breeding. The argument you need to succeed with is, there is no existing dog of a standard color that would not be as good as or better than a certain choice in a specific breeding than some specific black dog.

"Man enough" is used as a name calling challenge for baiting another individual. Somewhat beneath you and certainly unnecessary from one who is also a moderator.

Where I come from if you do or say something you're expected to own up to it, and if your stance has since changed (which is anyone's prerogative) you're expected to own up to that as well. It certainly wasn't name calling. If you incorrectly perceived it to be a challenge or a bait of some kind, which wasn't intended at all, please accept this explanation instead. I certainly wouldn't want to see a personal challenge or a bait of another individual coming from any member, moderator or not.

Where one comes from is neither an explanation nor an excuse. It is better accepted and simpler to explain what one meant than to always attempt to assert others are incorrect. That generally only fosters worthless debate.

I'm sorry, which specific questions did you ask of me?

The same you asked of me, but in reverse. Let's see here...
1) What is the betterment of the breed to you? And why do you believe that the exclusion of black colored GSPs is required for the betterment of the breed, or why do you believe that the inclusion of blacks is not necessary to provide the best options?
2) In your opinion, do you claim the current detractors of black dogs want the disqualification of black totally exclusive of any self-interest or economics, but purely for altruistic reasons?
3) Please comment on how in your opinion a future implementation date would be equitable to all GSP breeders taken as a whole, and why or whether such equity is needed for GSP breeders when considering the betterment of the breed as the primary reason for the inclusion or exclusion of the black color.

1. In order to describe betterment of the breed (not my words) one needs universally accepted criteria & measurement tools which have not been agreed upon nor established. Go ahead and take a stab at producing the criteria for public consumption.

2. I believe there are few, maybe no individuals that do not examine any proposed change to determine how they may or may not be impacted and consider how much this change may affect them or other's they care about and act accordingly.

3. If the corner on the black market (pun unintended) has economic value and if a future implementation date allows addition entrants to the market prior to the effective date I see equity being enhanced.

Betterment is easily used because it is undefined. It has good use as a sales tool because who can be against something "better", whatever that is.

[Ridge-Point]

My bitch is out of an american x german breeding both parents being liver so explain the relevance of the hustler/wendy breeding when it comes to black?

The hustler wendy breeding was just an example of how an american/german cross can produce outstanding dogs. There was no black involved there.

I'm not saying restricting black improves the breed what I am saying is people have been successfully breeding/showing liver dogs in this country for 70+ years without black being accepted so why now all of a sudden is there an urge to get it accepted in the show ring?

It isn't all of a sudden. People have been working at this for a number of years now.

[Adam]

How long have they been working at it?

[ezzy333]

We have this same discussion within the Brittany establishment and the thing I have found is that color has little value except to satisfy someone personal likes and dislikes. It has no real effect on the quality of the dogs.

This discussion is good but many have the proper order out of sequence. If there is a rule or law you disagree with them work at changing it. But until you get it changed you live with the present rules and laws. In other words< i do not or will not have or use a dog that does not conform to the standards of the breed whether it is color size, or other even more serious problems that is a disqualification. In the mean time I will do whatever I can to change the standard including dicsussions of this type. But this has to come before just ignoring the standards because you don't agree with them.

I think they call that democracy and living within the rule of law and I may be wrong but it has served me well over the years.

Ezzy

[Ayres]

Is this opinion or fact? One can say with impunity that any number of other people overlooked some other dog that may be a better (or worse) choice in any specific breeding. The argument you need to succeed with is, there is no existing dog of a standard color that would not be as good as or better than a choice in a specific breeding than some specific black dog.

What is fact is that, because currently black is a DQ color in the show ring, for a great number of breeders all black dogs are overlooked as additions to their breeding program. That restricts the breeding options, including those that may be a superior breeding match. You haven't directly addressed this point in three posts, so I believe I've succeeded with the argument.

Where one comes from is neither an explanation nor an excuse. It is better accepted and simpler to explain what one meant than to always attempt to assert others are incorrect. That generally only fosters worthless debate.

I never used it as an explanation or an excuse. What I said was that if a person says or does something, they need to own up to it. In this entire thread I haven't seen Ted duck the fact that he agreed with John in the 2008 thread, Edit: and in fact he's owned up to the argument. But he's still commented about how there are other reasons, mostly referencing DK breeders, and how he'll never vote to include black in the standard, so even though there is a FC/AFC solid black shorthair it didn't really make a difference. Further, you did incorrectly perceive my intent, twice. Instead of making worthless assumptions and then, when corrected, commenting about how you believe I've fostered a bad debate, why don't you simply address the points? Deflection is an art used very skillfully by those who don't want to talk about the issue in an intelligent manner, but would rather turn attention to the other speaker.

1) What is the betterment of the breed to you? And why do you believe that the exclusion of black colored GSPs is required for the betterment of the breed, or why do you believe that the inclusion of blacks is not necessary to provide the best options?
2) In your opinion, do you claim the current detractors of black dogs want the disqualification of black totally exclusive of any self-interest or economics, but purely for altruistic reasons?
3) Please comment on how in your opinion a future implementation date would be equitable to all GSP breeders taken as a whole, and why or whether such equity is needed for GSP breeders when considering the betterment of the breed as the primary reason for the inclusion or exclusion of the black color.

1. In order to describe betterment of the breed (not my words) one needs universally accepted criteria & measurement tools which have not been agreed upon nor established. Go ahead and take a stab at producing the criteria for public consumption.

2. I believe there are few, maybe no individuals that do not examine any proposed change to determine how they may or may not be impacted and consider how much this change may affect them or other's they care about and act accordingly.

3. If the corner on the black market (pun unintended) has economic value and if a future implementation date allows addition entrants to the market prior to the effective date I see equity being enhanced.

Betterment is easily used because it is undefined. It has good use as a sales tool because who can be against something "better", whatever that is.

1) You asked me about betterment of the breed, but you don't offer an explanation of your own. Then, do you take my explanation as fact? I don't believe and have never asserted that you need quantifiable data to explain betterment of the breed. As I stated, what is "best" is highly subjective. In my answer, though, I also related that disqualifying breeding options simply because a dog is black instead of liver (taking into account the history of the breed) doesn't allow the best selection in all cases.

2) That's not an answer to the question at all, unless one is to assume that when you say "consider how much this change may affect them" you mean personally, politically and economically rather than how it affects their notion of what is best for the breed. My question, like yours, asked for a specific answer on that subject. Is my assumption correct, or do you have further explanation?

3) You didn't answer the second half of my question: "and why or whether such equity is needed for GSP breeders when considering the betterment of the breed as the primary reason for the inclusion or exclusion of the black color." Simply, why does economic equity among breeders need to be considered at all?

[snips]

I just do not understand if the blacks are excepted everywhere else, WHY NOT in shows?????????????? What is the big darn deal?

[Adam]

I just do not understand if the blacks are excepted everywhere else, WHY NOT in shows?????????????? What is the big darn deal?

So are dogs with bad bites,china and wall eyes,yellow, solid white, tri-colored people are like dogs you give an Inch they'll take a mile so tell me if you think all of those other disqualifications should be accepted?

[Ayres]

This discussion is good but many have the proper order out of sequence. If there is a rule or law you disagree with them work at changing it. But until you get it changed you live with the present rules and laws. In other words, I do not or will not have or use a dog that does not conform to the standards of the breed whether it is color size, or other even more serious problems that is a disqualification. In the mean time I will do whatever I can to change the standard including dicsussions of this type. But this has to come before just ignoring the standards because you don't agree with them.

Except, of course, the fact that the AKC has an open registration for the GSP breed and black is a color that you can lawfully register. Further, working toward changing the breed standard takes more than just talking about a change - many times, this one included, actions speak louder than words. As was previously proposed by some well known field trialers, they wanted to see a black shorthair earn a FC title. How would that have even been possible if nobody owned a black AKC registered GSP to begin with?

[snips]

So by showing black or b/w that is accepting all other disqualifications? :roll:

[Ayres]

I just do not understand if the blacks are excepted everywhere else, WHY NOT in shows?????????????? What is the big darn deal?

So are dogs with bad bites,china and wall eyes,yellow, solid white, tri-colored people are like dogs you give an Inch they'll take a mile so tell me if you think all of those other disqualifications should be accepted?

Bad bites, china and wall eyes are health issues and I don't know a single individual who would ever assert that they should be removed from the DQ list. Yellow, solid white and tri-colored dogs are not a part of the GSP history. The slippery slope argument doesn't hold water in this case because the black color in the history of the breed predates the American breed standard.

This argument is simply an attempt to instill unnecessary and unfounded fear in the undecided sector of GSPCA members. It has NO factual basis and I'm disappointed to even have to address something as silly as this. Sorry if this sounds a little harsh.

[Adam]

Yellow, solid white and tri-colored dogs are not a part of the GSP history.

You might want to check into this a little...

[Adam]

So by showing black or b/w that is accepting all other disqualifications? :roll:

What makes the black disqualification any different than any of the others at this time according to the AKC standard?

[dan v]

I just do not understand if the blacks are excepted everywhere else, WHY NOT in shows?????????????? What is the big darn deal?

Way, Way off topic...but riddle me this. Limited registration dogs can enter anything within AKC...except a conformation show. Why?

[snips]

If black was accepted, then you could show it and win, moving toward a CH...If you show a bad bite you will not get put up (hopefully:)

[Ayres]

Yellow, solid white and tri-colored dogs are not a part of the GSP history.

You might want to check into this a little...

If you can reference me something that proves yellow, solid white and tri-colored dogs were accepted colors in GSP history I'll retract that statement. Otherwise, the difference remains.

[vzkennels]

Ayers I have tried to stop commenting on this subject but you keep throwing my name up here & I thought I did admit to making that statement when I said it was not the only reason.It seems you want to keep it up untill maybe I do say something that you can use to ban me.If that's the case just ban me but I think as you can see not even all the people that show want it approved.
If you want to ignore the color DQ of the standard like I stated earlier just do away with the standard completely & go from there or re write it to include all colors like lemon,all white,Dobe marked,Gelber brand
Seems there are a few that doesn't think color should have anything to do with the breed.I for one disagree.
But the reasons I WILL NEVER VOTE FOR IT has nothing to do with color for the FINAL TIME.

[vzkennels]

Let me ask a stupid question is there anything that says you can't take a black into a show ring.I'm not sure there is,you will just be DQed & ask to leave same if you are DQed for a bad bite or other DQ's.

[Ayres]

Correction: Ted owned up to making the statement. But there are still other reasons to disallow black in his opinion, so the opinion has not changed even in light of the new FC/AFC solid black shorthair.

I'll make an edit in my previous post noting that you owned up to the statement, Ted.

[Ayres]

Let me ask a stupid question is there anything that says you can't take a black into a show ring.I'm not sure there is,you will just be DQed & ask to leave same if you are DQed for a bad bite or other DQ's.

I'm not sure the breed judge would let a black dog into the show ring, but rather DQ it on the spot. Never tried it, though, as I figured it would be a waste of an entry fee.

[vzkennels]

Exactly Ayers a waste of money but so is showing a dog with a bad bite or is it ?
I will give you an example yrs ago a friend of mine took a Dobe bitch into the show ring at the CIN Dobe Breed Specialty she was DQed for having too many missing teeth.
Guess what this bitch was a couple yrs old & had been shown many times before with placements including 1 Reserve Winners Bitch.

[Adam]

* Report this post
* Reply with quote

Re: My new Thunderhead Puppy

Postby mountaindogs » Sun Jan 10, 2010 12:26 am
From Der Deutsch Kurzhaar, The German Shorthaired Pointer” by Georgina M. Byrne:
as found on http://www.dogstuff.info/breed_standard ... byrne.html

"It is interesting that the German Standard allows what amounts to tricolour with its allowed "sandy colour" on the muzzle and feet. Atta Sand, a littermate of the very important sire, Artus Sand, was tricoloured (Maxwell, 1965), but I have no idea of how her colours were distributed. I have asked several distinguished German fanciers about the "Gelber Brand", and there seems to be some disagreement as to what it really is. There is no doubt however, that it is very rare.

It is important to recognise that dogs left in the sun will often suffer bleaching of the coat, on the head and muzzle in particular, and dogs which are out of coat may have a striking variation in colour between the old coat and the new. Such dogs cannot be called tricoloured.

Our first few litters produced a number of dogs which had an area of slightly bleached-looking hairs towards the end of the tail. This was virtually invisible in the ticked dogs, but could readily be seen in the solid livers. The individual hairs had an "agouti" appearance, with definite shading along their length, from light liver to dark. It was not penalised by judges and seems to have disappeared from our dogs.

I do not know of any black with a liver (or any other coloured) patch, although I have seen two liver and white littermates which had what amounted to "pink patches." These were a single area of coat which looked as if it had had bleach spilt on it. This condition may well have been due to a somatic mutation, like the black spots sometimes appearing on Cocker Spaniels and Irish Setters (Little, 1957). I do not believe that such dogs could be regarded as being true tricolours from the breeding point of view, but conformation judges well might interpret them as such.

One would expect that a tricoloured GSP would have markings similar to those of, for example, a tricoloured spaniel. These consist of the basic liver or black colouring plus tan markings in such locations as eyebrows, cheeks, legs and underside of tail. Buchwald (1945), quoted by Burns (1952) designated the "bicolor" markings found (only rarely) in the "Short-haired Bird Dog" as being "a la Dachshund." In the same chapter (Burns, 1952), an investigation of the colouration of GSPs listed in the Danish Studbooks (Volumes 55 to 67), included the description of Hesthaven’s Rap 31845, as follows: "brown-speckled with brown spots. Tricoloured head. Hound markings." Rap was the sire of the famous stud, Bob (Koge) 35447. Also, a brother of Rap was described as: "Tricoloured. Hound markings on cheeks and ear." I have never seen a GSP with such colouration, but I have seen a liver and white German Wirehair with similar tan markings to those mentioned above."
----------------
I suppose my jury is still out as to whether it is truly "Gelber Brand" Is this the same color reffered to for dobermans, or dachshunds? Do they call that "Gelber Brand?" Why would it have it's own unique name if not? The Germans surely have other breeds with tan points like that. Is it rare merely because it is not preffered? Is it rare becaue it was never bred? It seems the "known tri-color gene" is merely a linked recessive, and would be easy to become much more prevelant with a little bit if breeding it. I don't think I would find it extremely rare, but I don't think like some people. Does anyone have a picture of it before the 50's? Or even pictures of any of the dogs mentions above?