Okay this is out of left field but I care about the topic and just get irked at some people who breed dogs. I bred labs -- two whole litters -- and believe me spent more money on the care and feeding of the litters than I made from them even though they were high priced pups. They were healthy, well adjusted pups and the parents were heavily scrutinized and certified before any union took place. Did not breed mama past her 6th birthday. I want to do it again and I still get calls for pups from someone who knows someone who has one of my dogs.
Now there is the "silver" lab, the "red fox" and the "white". Just as in horses -- when someone breeds for COLOR they are breeding for phenotype -- (looks) rather than breeding for the genotype (what the dog is really made of). The red fox and the white labs are color variations of the yellow lab -- just shades of that genotype but they are YELLOW labs. They are not a different dog, there is no classification for "cream", "white", "red fox" or anything of the sort -- they are still 100% acceptable to the lab world. I personally don't breed for that specific of a shade of color but if done responsibly it can work out just fine. With the "whites" when you begin to lose skin pigmentation you are going down the wrong road and you must stop.
The "rare silver" is something that has begun to worry me -- it is outside blood, a strange double recessive expression or a combination of both. I have a family looking for a pup right now and I am looking for them and doing a bit of the homework for them based on what they are looking for. The local lab community is tight that way and we promote each other's dogs when we know they are good, well bred animals. The silver is not "rare" and when I see them advertised they cost twice as much! Don't do it! The AKC won't recognize the dog anyway. Getting outside blood into a gene pool is not a bad thing necessarily -- it helps stave off double recessive genes becoming prevalent. It seems as though the "silver" color might actually be a double recessive expression and since we don't know what other traits it affects it should be avoided. The Labrador gene pool is plenty large to keep the breed alive, well and healthy without tossing another breed in JUST to get a color. When that is done -- it simply promotes a breeding program now more heavily focused on breeding for THAT color variation thus making that particular gene pool very small.
There are many reasons why silver Labradors should not be produced and the main one is that they are a disqualification and adhering to a standard while breeding is what keeps a breed a breed. The Labrador looks and acts like Labrador and not a German Shepherd because of the dedicated breeders preserving the breed. A standard is a blueprint and varying that blueprint because it looks nice will undoubtedly cause the structure to fail. Also silver breeders do not typically run health clearances on their breeding stock (OFA/CERF) nor do they participate in any competitions to prove their dogs are breeding quality. This leads me to believe that they are breeding simply to make money and do not care about a superior individual nor do they care about the breed in general.
Silver breeders also blatantly lie. They have information on their websites that talk about DNA testing done by the AKC and a researcher at UC Berkley. Both are not true. AKC never did any genetic mapping of silver Labradors nor do they have any plans to do so since they are a registering body only and the Labrador Club of America writes the standard for the breed. Also Dr. Neff at UC Berkley was never looking into whether or not silver Labs were purebred or not which is also a moot point since DNA testing can only prove parentage at this point and is not specific enough to search for breed markers.
So if you are looking for a Christmas puppy for the family a Labrador is a great choice -- pick a yellow (in all its variations) a Chocolate or a Black -- steer clear of that Silver -- it ain't a Lab you want....
No comments:
Post a Comment