 |
Merle
Updates
Updated July 11, 2008
This website is copyrighted. Any comments you wish to
use in a forum, website, etc..are fine to use AS LONG AS CREDIT is given
back to this website.
This page was created as an update on the merle
cocker issue.
We'll try to update this with any new information
and current going-on's regarding Merle Cockers
The merle is finally making an impact with Cocker breeders in the show
community.
It's out in the open and ASC is trying to figure out what to do about
it.
There are still several who REFUSE to discuss it, and hope if they
put their head in the sand it will go away, which of course, it isn't going
to.
Some show breeders are absolutely hysterical over the issue, some think
all merles and their offspring should be killed,
and feel that merle owners FALSELY register their merles with AKC and
should be thrown out, suspended, tarred and feathered and run out of the
universe.
Others have stopped screaming and are trying to learn about the merle
gene, and how it will impact future cocker pedigrees and health.
Some show breeders are quietly in the "closet" breeding and/or owning
merles,( while a very few )others have come out and said YES!
I own a merle cocker and YES I do breed them.
Others are curious and think the merle is interesting.
All in all people are listening now, although many are still rather
confused,being many have never owned a merle of any breed.
The bottom line is merles are now a part of the cocker breed, whether
introduced or whether a mutation, or whether it has always been there,
no one knows for sure.
But we CAN trace merles back for at least 18 years now. They are breeding
true, and don't appear to have any more health issues than "regular" cockers.
NEW UPDATE: July 10, 2008
This letter was sent to me from an email list.
Names and such have been removed to protect this person who is highly involved
in the breed.
I normally don't get involved in this type of
discussion but here goes, foot in mouth. This history of merles is
nothing but a big fable and not true. Not one dog can be traced back
to this so called start of merles. Merles have been around in many
breeds for hundreds of years but the breeders drowned the puppies at birth.
The exact same way we did with chocolate cockers not so many years ago.
This fable is very similar to the lies XXXXXXX harped on when she told
everyone that sable cockers were the result of mixing a beagle with a cocker.
Very shortly (this ages me) before I started in cockers, breeders "bucketed"
tri colors as they were undesirable. All dogs originate from the same beginning,
hundreds, thousands of years ago. A recessive gene can exist for
many, many generations. Francis Greer, of cocker genetic fame, was
my mentor in cockers. My first cocker, XXXXXXX produced chocolate.
There was no chocolate behind him so, of course, something must be mixed
in. Francis did a 25 generation pedigree and found dozens of crosses
to chocolates, and dogs known to have produced chocolate. It only takes
the right gene combination and you will have any color. When I was
breeding, I could produce sable in any litter if the unsable parent carried
the tan points. Over the past 45 years, I have watched breeder after breeder
euthanize (a more politically correct now that "bucket) the unusual and
undesirable colors. Now, all these colors are the "rare" colors and
worth lots of money, lol. ................................................
In the ASC Board Minutes from April 2008, Zone
V commented that they were still discussing merles.*NOTE
See ASC Board Minutes page on the merle
issue
Plus, they had a copy from AKC's Mr Gladstone
who wrote a letter to the Chihuahua Club of America encouraging them NOT
to vote the merle pattern out, and why.
You can read the letter here
(opens in PDF)
Here is a copy of the letter the President of
the Chihuahua Club wrote to AKC with some GREAT ideas, and which ASC should
follow.
It seems VERY simple to most of us, doesn't it?
Merle cockers are NOT going away no matter how much ASC wishes it so.
It seems ASC is more concerned about falling memberships, not getting
new people to join, the new president requesting mentoring programs.
Yet, if a "known" merle owner wants to join, they are not allowed in.
Imagine that!!
Sources say that ASC thinks that merles are no longer a "problem" and
they are fading away.
This is so not true. Breeders are breeding them to Champions and back
into champion lines.
The quality in many merle cockers is just as good if not better in
some circumstances than what is in the ring.
ASC NEEDS to wake up and allow AKC to list the
merle pattern, NOW!
May
5, 2008
The ASC now has it's new President and Board,
and from word from the "front lines" is that the current board is anti
merle and
have mentioned they plan to do NOTHING about
the issue of the merle cocker spaniel. They THINK if they ignore it they
will go away.
They THINK it is a back yard breeder and puppy
mill problem and it has no bearing on Show Lines.LOL
Boy that could be nothing further than the truth,
as many many good breeders INCLUDING show breeders (abeit hiding their
merles)
have been and are breeding their Champions and
other Champions to merle cockers. The quality is quite nice and
many of us wouldn't be the least bit surprised
if a hidden merle or 2...have already obtained their Championship.LOL
Quite legally...since according to ASC merles
don't exist....Melres are now being regsitered their correct color.Since
ASC hasn't ALLOWED AKC to list the merle pattern as a marking..then who
is to know.Of course, everyone will know if they breed unknowingly to a
merle and end up
having to renig with a potential futurity nominated
MERLE litter.LOL
We THINK that ASC doesn't know how to THINK.
July 06, 2007
The Summer
Nationals are getting ready to start soon, in OKC, and the ASC meeting
will be held there as well.
Of course much of the meeting will probably
be about their latest embezzlement fiasco,
but they are also supposed to be deciding
on what to do about the merle cocker.
At their last ASC board meeting, it was written
in their Minutes that "The ideal goal is to eradicate
merle gene from the cocker spaniel gene pool.
"(1-2007 Board Meeting)*NOTE
See ASC Board Minutes page on the merle
issue
Well, it's a little too late for that since
merles have been bred for going on 20 years at least.
And most lines including many many show lines
are now in a merle pedigree.
It's time for the ASC to buck up, lick it's
wounds and allow this pattern to be listed with AKC.
First of all, they claimed it wasn't purebred
and actually set themselves for a big slander lawsuit by posting a photo
of a merle dog with a notation that cockers who were that color were NOT
purebred.
We are all glad to know that the Powers that
BE at ASC are all well respected and revered geneticists that can give
such a solid statement
about DNA. NOT!
Then they decided to contact Dr Murphy, who
basically told them the merle gene is an ANCIENT gene and is in all dogs,
even though some
do not manifest the pattern.
So THAT didn't work.
ASC decided to get merle owners to submit
photos and blood for DNA in hopes they could prove they weren't purebred
and get AKC to throw them all out.
This also did not work.
AKC told them "They will register merles however
they can and will not refuse to register a
cocker based on color alone.” Nor will they
revoke any registrations unless we can show
color pedigree proof that they are not purebred."
(April
2006 Board Meeting)
Now they are dragging their feet, hoping
it will go away. They are now saying they wish to put it off so they can
get another DNA sample from another merle cocker
whose owner says does not go back to Rusty
Butch. Many of us already know this story. They bred a merle bitch to their
dog but they didn't have papers on her, so they put the papers from a dead
bitch on these pups, made up the story about it being a cryptic or hidden
merle,LOL and falsely registered the litter.
Even if they do DNA on this dog, the dog will
still come back as a cocker it just won't have the correct dam. But They
won't take our word for it
It's pretty much just another excuse to drag
their feet.
But that's ok.
On the American Spaniel Club: Views
on Merle Cockers page, there is a tidbit of information written
in January 2007
about a new program the AKC is implementing.
This program is now up and running.
It's called Conditional
Registration
What it says in short, is that AKC will register
a dog from an unknown parent, who
appears to be purebred and had full AKC registration
and the same breed as the other parent.
These dogs with a conditional registration
call still show in performance events, be bred and offspring registered,
but cannot be shown in conformation or Field
Trial events.
After 3 generations, the dog is considered
purebred and the next generation will be able to have FULL registration
and compete
in all venues including conformation shows.
This means ASC cannot get out of this now.
It also states on the AKC website that "If
the dogs in question do not appear to be purebred, an impure breeding complaint
can be made to the Impure Breeding Committee, which will open an inquiry
and take appropriate action."
Rusty Butch would be nearing his 28th birthday
this October, so it is going to be rather difficult to get DNA on him to
prove he or his offspring weren't "purebred".
These next 2 or 3 weeks may prove interesting,
and I know that AKC wants to wrap this matter up. Let's hope ASC gets off
their duffs and does something
They have certainly shown the apathy they
have in the other events that have recently taken place.
 
1-30-2007
MetaMorphix Introduces Canine
Heritage(TM) -- The First DNA-Based Diagnostic Test to Identify Canine
Breeds
Link
to article
Because this is a large article and there are
many comments as well as an interview with the company, this will be on
a new web page
 
I am doing a private study along with 3 others, 2 who own merles, on
any health issues with merles. especially double merles or dogs from double
merles.
From what I am hearing, there really hasn't been many problems, even
from the double merle cockers. Not much that can be attributed to strictly
the merle gene.
Anyone who wishes to participate and will send
me info on their dogs, would be greatly appreciated. It is totally
anonymous,
I don't care who you are, no one is going to tell anyone. This is a
private study. And Test results, CERF papers are needed if possible.
Now for comments:
This is merle basics and a FYI for those
who don't have the time to read through this site.
We have spoken with several merle breeders both in Cockers and in other
breeds who have had merle and have bred them successfully for years.
Recently, we invited a guest speaker on the ShowCockers list who raises
and shows merle Border Collies to try and dispel rumors and educate the
fancy on merle.
To read the transcript, click here.
It will download in MS Word format.
Genetic Inheritance of the Merle Gene It is only
recently that
investigators at the Texas A&M University
(reference: PNAS, 2006,
103(5):1376-81) discovered a mutation in the
dog SILV gene and found it
to be responsible for the merle coat color patterning
in ALL dogs. The
merle gene (/M/) is inherited in an autosomal
fashion. In other words,
the trait is not linked to gender and can be
passed on from either the
mother or the father.
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/0506940103v1
http://sask.usask.ca/~schmutz/merle.html
http://www.gdca.org/health/merlegene.htm
More info out there..just Google it.
FYI on Merle
1. A cocker who has 1 merle parent and one regular parent..Does not
have any problem of being defective other than the normal negative health
genes afflicting our breed.
But to go into it farther, breeding merle in with the piebald
and extreme white piebald gene can produce deafness.In other breeds, the
more white the dog has, the more potential problems it could have when
bred to a merle.
So far, I haven't heard anything about the merle/parti problem in cockers.
Although many have suggested to breed merle to a solid in order to
better determine merle at birth, as well as not hide it, as buff, silver,
white and sable can often hide the merling in a cocker. It can also
avoid problems associated with the piebald gene found in some other breeds.
2. ONLY MERLE to MERLE breeding can bring out potential lethal genes,
and some, even all in the litter may not be afflicted with anything.
The 2 lethal genes have to be paired up in order to possibly produce
a problem.
3. The "lethal" gene associated with the merle pattern CANNOT
be passed down in a pedigree. It HAS to be a merle to merle breeding.
If it is a non merle to merle breeding, there IS NO PROBLEM
4.Merle is an incomplete dominant gene..if the parents are not merle
you won't have merle, one of the parents has to be a merle in order to
produce merle
The "lethal" gene associated with merle stops with the merle. It doesn't
go any further, nada nothing.
5.I've been researching the merles for a few years now, and from what
I can gather, no one has reported that there has
been ANY special health problems assocated with merle breeding in cockers,
nor even with merle to merle breeding in cockers.
Yes, some could have lied but many were very upfront about this.
From pedigree research, some of todays merle cockers are from double
merle breedings, some have this
2 or 3 times in a pedigree.Apparantly the dogs weren't sterile or had
any problems.
6. Yes merle has been bred successfully for many many years in other
breeds and they all say that if you do not breed merle to merle you should
not have any problems.
I know some do not wish to look at other breeds, but by investigating
merle in other breeds, we can learn about it and apply that knowledge to
our breed.
Merle cockers are not going to go away, so we need to learn as much
about this as we can. Screaming at each other, pointing fingers,
hurling insults do not help in any way towards trying to understand
the merle pattern and any problems that could be associated with it.
Merle does need to be identified and able to be listed with AKC or there
very well could be some real problems
down the road IF there is a problem in cockers with merle to merle
breeding.
As for people lying about the color with AKC, there are several colors
that ARE currently acceptable that ARE NOT listed with
AKC on cockers, so does this mean they aren't "pure-bred" either?
No, this means whoever made up the acceptable list didn't do their
homework before it was presented to AKC.
Current COMMENTS about the merle issue-Oldest
to newest
Many breeds have faced similar issues and they do choose to ignore
them or hope they resolve themselves. Many breed clubs are facing
color issues and many
web sites are informative as to why certain colors are not shown.
Many breeds have colors available to register within the breed but
do not allow the
color to be shown. For example a white Doberman, a flowered Shar Pei,
or a merle Dane the list is rather long. In all the national
breed sites you don't see
the cry/banner/attitude these dogs are not pure breed and the papers
were issued by AKC based on lies. But you read genuine concern and
guidance for those
who own a dog of the undesirable color. If you go to the parent
clubs web sites nearly all educate breeders, they warn buyers, they
are aggressive in
trying to halt the progress of colors they deem detrimental to their
breed none take the position they are mutts and have invalid papers, they
are not our
problem, they are on their own. These clubs say with all the class
and professionalism that these colors are not correct, desirable,
preferred but if you
buy one you should know this. More flies with honey theory at its
best.
Obviously many breeds have merles and continue to thrive despite
the merle genes because their breeders are educated. Pet breeders in
all merle breeds continue
to raise deaf, blind or have dead litters. But then many non
merle puppies have whelped with the same problems. You cannot be
responsible for them all
but you can step up and say if you have a merle please use caution,
identify your dog and educate your buyers. AKC can and will
continue to register them
and will eventually persuade ASC to come to terms with the issue.
Many have already been DNA tested. ASC can try and publicly wage
a war with AKC and
tell the public that AKC is registering dogs that are not purebred
based on a improbable result of a mating that took place 25 years
ago and take on the PR
nightmare and backlash it will cause. Some where a merle
breeder will find a lawyer and sue ASC for claiming that AKC issued a false
registration paper
and ASC has destroyed the value of their paperwork. Look at any
stud book in the last two years and those aren't all roans being whelped
or the hundreds of
puppies on numerous classified web pages. And there is no way
to tell how many breeders are using other colors to identify
their merles. AKC is often
the deciding factor in how to register the color, breeders send
in photos and AKC registers the animal to the closest color. Which
by the way is what each
one of us does. As I wrote before many cockers are not
registered properly.
Reds that are no where near red, Silvers not even close. Black/tans
as blacks. Black and whites that are tris or even clear sables. Brown
sable and whites
as just sable and white. And how do you register a brown and
tan roan? And what about a sable roan or what about a dilute red/white.
a red/tan or a blue
and tan or blue and white or blue tri ????? Face it the
current list leaves many colors some of which CAN be shown to register
to the closest color. And
as to the breeder who registers a dog not approved in the standard
or a color not on the list as being liars I take great offense to
that statement. I am
aware sables are not approved to be shown but they do and have existed
for a long time and so have other colors in spaniel stud books
that are not
mentioned in the standard. MERLE IS A COLOR NEVER FOUND IN ANY SPANIEL/SPORTING
GROUP STUD BOOK
but comments like those made by some are sure to offend many
who have sables, brown/tan roans, blues and dilutes Some of the very
people who
are the most vocal against merles have these colors themselves.
You can't say if you register OR BREED a color not within the standard
you are
unethical. Somehow that isn't really logical given our choices.
The list of champion bloodlines now behind merles being whelped in August
2006 are mind blowing. Do your own web search and look at the pedigrees
see
first hand. It doesn't matter solid, buff, parti, brown or
sable nearly every bloodline with any success is now in a merle pedigree
somewhere. I haven't
bred a litter in 15 years and it didn't take long to find a merle
pedigree that went back to one of my old pedigrees. They have had
a good 10-15 years to
get the PEDIGREES there and it only takes one generation and
one breeding to get the color. So breed a merle to a champion
and then her puppy to a champion
and that puppy to a well bred dog and it takes maybe 6 years
a that. By the way XXXX is not the only person on this list breeding
merles just the only
one to come out to take the heat.
A Z list was possible 15 years ago when ASC was first alerted but in
my telephone discussion with AKC I have been lead to believe
that the sheer number
of dogs now descending from Rusty Butch is in the thousands and
far too expensive to go back and issue Z list additions. Plus Rusty Butch
was not the
source himself only his name was used it seems and DNA testing
is not possible. AKC would need some genetic research to back the
theory up. The bigger issue
is those breeders who are breeding sables to merles and roans
and buffs all of which HIDE and distort the pattern. Making double
merle breeding more
likely not less likely. This is just setting the stage
for problems. Having thousands of puppies registered as roans is not
an answer either but now maybe a
third of the merles are not even partis. Many of the ones being
bred now are solid merles or sable merles. Obviously not acknowledging
the problem has in
no way slowed the progress of the merles. The breed has a few
choices let the situation continue as is and watch the genes spread
unchecked, identify them
as merles on registration paperwork and aggressively educate
the public to the dangers, or raise funds ourselves and force AKC
to dig through 25 years of
paperwork and Z list all descendents of Rusty Butch which I could
never get a clear answer on if that would even be acceptable to AKC. But
it will be
VERY expensive. Would that money be better spent on researching
health issues?
Most of the breeders are not in favor of merles and I am in no
way approving of the color. Yet I am troubled by the spread of the
gene without identifying
it and trying to slow its spread. Most of the people on this
list know from life the more something is forbidden or unusual
the greater the demand. Even
if you had the power to block every merle cocker trying to become
registered what would you do about the generations before do you
really think AKC will
revoke that many papers???? AKC papers are not really important
anymore to many pet owners because we ourselves so often withhold
them that pet buyers
don't care they just want a puppy without hassles. This
maybe only a fad but like many other fads it is here for a
long while, Gee how many years did it
take the hula hoop to fade or the slinky? There is no easy answer and
it will take many people to work side by side to find a good solution
that will
benefit all cockers not just protect the show ones. Why shouldn't
the cocker world look to the ASC to resolve the dilemma because in
reality they are the only
ones who can?
One further note as show breeders we should feel a responsibility
to the whole breed not just show dogs. Taking part in rescue, public
education,
performance, field work and the cocker world as a whole. Even
though show breeders make up a small very small percentage of cockers being
born we can have the
greatest impact.
I wish that we could be more appreciative of the fact that there are
AKC breeds that accept merle, consequences and all, BECAUSE
attitudes which portray using merles as irresponsible or always unhealthy
will alienate all the breeds that do accept merle.
I am not on one side or the other as far as merles, although I can appreciate
the ability to register the color in order to identify
it. However this whole argument that all merles are going to produce
portions of litters that will have deformities is demeaning to those
breeds that do accept merles on one hand while being demeaning to all
other breeders on the other hand. It is demeaning because it is
almost as though the predetermined assumption is that no amount of
education on how not to use merles in a pedigree could work in
cockers. I guess we are assuming that our breed has breeders who are
not as smart as those breeds which manage to accept and even show
merles?
I understand that some people can't handle the idea of a merle and that's
okay, I personally don't care. I wouldn't have sables because
I only wanted to have dogs I could show if I wanted to, and that's
okay also. BUT I am not demeaning towards those people who do.
Further, and more importantly, because Shetland Sheepdogs, Collies,
Cardigan Welsh Corgis, Australian Shepherds, Border Collies accept
merle, I cannot accept the use of the arguments being tossed around.
I believe these arguments to be demeaning to the breeders of those
breeds and I do not think that being demeaning toward other breeders
in any breed is good for any dog breed, including ours. Identify the
color if you like but do not portray every breeder that deals with
merles as bad, that simply is not true as there are nice merles in
shelties etc and they came from good breeders.
As far as lying on a pedigree goes, if the color is not represented
on the registration form (which obviously occurs in both acceptable
and unacceptable colors) why should the dog loose its ability to be
registered? If someone has a blue I would love to see a picture, but
I would not love to see it removed from the gene pool simply because
the color selection is not on the registration forms even though it
is an acceptable color.
I would like to know how or if you all would have registered Crig-Mar's
Crazy Quilt? I have no idea if that dog was ever bred but I
wonder if you all think it should have been removed from the gene pool.
As I recall, the first brown was a result of a brother/sister
breeding and would not have existed if laws like the one recently proposed
in NJ existed around the country back when the brown color
emerged. Would that have been a good thing? Are we starting to sound
like maybe it would have been? That is scary because in today's
climate the government seems to want to determine these things for
us. Is that what we want? I think that is exactly what we do NOT
want, I think that all some people want is to be able to recognize
merle on a pedigree and not in a show ring. I think some are saying
they want this because doubling up on merle can be dangerous, and that
is a rational reason. However, making it sound like breeding
merles is, in general an irresponsible, terrible, always unhealthy
thing to do is irresponsible as it is an overboard reaction to try
and discourage merle but it does not take into account all the wonderful
breeders in breeds that accept merle and manage to do
alright with them. Breeders of cockers should not be bashing patterns
that are acceptable in other breeds for the reasons I have
been reading here because it is bashing ALL breeders of merles regardless
of what breed they are in. Bashing breeders of merles in
other breeds that accept the pattern is dangerous for all breeders
because of the political climate we are in. It is not in our best
interest to say that show breeders in the breeds that accept merles
are purposely breeding unhealthy dogs, because we are show breeders
also and we do not need to fuel the anti breeding opposition that we
try to overcome every day.
There have been no health studies done with merle Cockers and there
is no scientific data to back-up allegations that merles are unhealthy
or that they have a lethal gene. As another pointed out, the issues
that are considered "lethal" in merle to merle breedings in other breeds
generally occur in utero or at birth and in no way affect the pet buying
public. Nor do the puppies suffer as those in question are stillborn
and were never alive outside of the womb. Additionally, how can anyone
claim to know why a puppy is stillborn or why a litter is smaller?
I've had stillborn puppies in MANY non-merle litters as well as small litters
from bitches that threw large litters previously. Saying that these
problems are related to the merle gene is difficult if not impossible to
substantiate as care and condition of the bitch (different food, injury,
extreme heat or cold - and any number of health issues - viral or bacterial
infection, disease, medications, etc. - can and do affect the health and
size of a litter.
While anyone has the right to make an ass of themselves, those that
do so by spouting half-truths and hysterical gibberish are not helping
our breed. Anyone that wants to help our breed should realize
that alienating a large part of the rest of the purebred dog community
(by disparaging all merle dogs and all merle breeders) is NOT going to
help anyone. The fact of the matter is, any number of other breeds
have the merle pattern, these dogs are healthy and the breeds are thriving
(the pattern is obviously NOT a detriment to their breeds) and the merle
breeders that are involved in these breeds are responsible, caring breeders
who produce quality, healthy, happy puppies. These breeds focus on
educating their breeders and the pet buying public and have made great
strides in minimizing any risk associated with merle breedings. Making
poorly researched, unsubstantiated statements that paint all merle breeders
(of any breed) as uncaring, money hungry, puppy-killers is detrimental
to purebred dogs as a whole. This type of attitude only serves to
further split the ranks of dog breeders and to fuel the public's belief
that show breeders are selling unhealthy, inbred and over-priced dogs.
Merle breeders register their dogs as they have been instructed to do
by AKC. Almost every merle breeder I have ever spoken to has tried
to register at least one of their dogs as a merle. We have sent pictures,
alternate codes, we have called, blah, blah, blah. AKC says "choose
the color listed on the registration form that most closely describes your
dog". And that is what we do.
AKC doesn't decide if pictures sent of a dog show that it is a "registerable"
color. They look at the pictures and choose the color that they believe
most closely describes the dog. If the AKC employee doing the registration
sees a red/white, it's registered as a red/white. If the dog appears
black/white or tri, the person working for AKC chooses black/white or tri.
For merles that have the mottled coat pattern, AKC most often chooses ROAN!
THE BREEDER DOESN'T MAKE THE CHOICE! Many of those arguing about
merle registrations and complaining about merle breeders "lying" or doing
something dishonest refuse to listen or absorb what we have said over and
over again! AKC is often the one deciding how these dogs are registered!!
Many of us have sent pictures to AKC trying to register our dogs correctly
and AKC has chosen the color that is on our dogs' registrations.
AKC chose to register my red/white sable merles as red/whites. AKC
has chosen to register brown sable merles as browns, brown/tans and as
sables. AKC has chosen to register merles as every other color that
is listed as acceptable.
Additionally, for those that don't think merle Cockers are entitled
or
deserving of registration privileges, AKC plainly states on their web-site
that they WILL NOT deny registration of any dog due to color alone!
Maybe some of the color Nazis ought to rethink registering THEIR DOGS with
AKC if they don't like the registry's rules and regulations!
Having or not having these dogs within the breed is NO LONGER
ACHOICE. We HAVE merles within our breed and we MUST deal with the
situation
as it stands. This does not mean that you have to own or breed
merles, but it does mean that for the health of the breed and the integrity
of our
pedigrees, you and every other Cocker breeder and owner MUST insist
that ASC allow the dogs to be correctly registered.
It doesn't matter whether you personally think merles should have a
placewithin the breed. (You are entitled to your opinion, but your
personal
beliefs are not necessarily relevant to the situation as regards the
breed
as a whole.) Merle Cockers already have a well-defined place
within thebreed and they are firmly established as registered members of
our breed
(like any number of other unlisted but well-known colors!). AKC
is notgoing to pull these dogs' papers or institute a "Z" list. The
inclusion of
merles in the breed was decided 25 years ago when the first KNOWN merles(not
necessarily the first merles but the first known merles) were
registered by AKC. Since these dogs were not challenged initially
and since they and their descendents have been bred and registered with
AKC
continuously for the last 25 years, there is NO way to successfully
challenge their inclusion within the breed at this late date. The
only
question left to resolve is how to register the dogs to prevent health
issues that might be associated with the merle pattern.
BTW, there is no PROOF as to where the merle gene did or did not come
from.
Nor is there a test to determine if a cross-breeding occurred.
A mutation IS a possibility as, by definition, a mutation is a previously
unseen
condition/characteristic that appears suddenly within the gene pool.
As I have also already addressed, there are several possibilities for how
this
gene could have remained hidden within OUR breed - keep in mind that
the multitude of colors within our breed is somewhat unique in the purebred
dog
world and this may play a role in the expression of the merle gene.
It has also been acknowledged that culling of puppies with "different"
colors has
been a common practice within our breed and one that could help explain
why merles were not seen earlier in the breed's history.
Others also asked: "If they are not a registered color, not a showable
colorwhy breed them at all? " Again, several people have already
addressed this
question, but I will try to summarize this for you.
First, while some purebred dog owners choose to show their dogs, the
majority of purebred dogs are owned as pets and are never shown.
Showing is
a personal choice and not one that is right for everyone or for every
dog.This holds true whether the dog has an acceptable color or not.
Not every
purebred dog owner has the same interests and no one has the right
to determine that an owner must pursue one show venue or another as a deciding
factor in whether a dog can or should be bred! Please keep in
mind that enforcing personal beliefs of breeding ethics onto every breeder
endangers
EVERYONE's right to breed! We are facing major attacks on our
rights as animal owners and we MUST support EVERYONE's right to breed as
they see fit!
(This does not mean that I feel everyone must sell their dogs for breeding
purposes to anyone that asks. We are all entitled to sell our dogs
as we
see fit too!)
Second, there are numerous colors in Cockers that are considered acceptable
but which are not listed as choices for registration. Additionally,
there
are some colors listed for registration that cannot be shown.
If your argument is that any dog with a color that cannot be correctly
registered or
any dog whose color does not allow it to be shown cannot/should not
be bred, then you must intend to stop the breeding of ALL sables, dilutes
and/or
brown/tan roans, mis-marks AND merles. If, instead, you wish
to discriminate against just the merles, then this is really not about
whether
the dogs can be registered correctly or shown. It is merely a
personal prejudice against the color. Which is perfectly fine.
You are entitled to
your own opinion and the choice of whether to own or breed merle Cockers
isentirely yours. However, please keep in mind that not everyone
shares your
prejudice. Some of us have different interests and beliefs and
choose topursue a different path. This does not make either of our
choices "wrong",
it just means that we are different people with different beliefs.
(It is important to remember that show breeders produce a VERY small percentage
of
the total number of registered dogs in most breeds. While we
might like to iimagine we are the largest part of the breed, we are the
minority and cannot
ASSUME that our way is the only way that matters!).
I do not believe that this color is going to go away or that we can
bury our heads in the sand and pretend that they don't affect us just because
we
can't show them. Many people have and do breed mis-marks and
sables andover the course of our breed's history, many other colors have
been bred
that were not allowed in the show ring - tris, browns, black/tans.
We allknow that not every dog meets the criteria for the show ring or carries
markings that are conducive to finishing a championship title (sables,mis-marked
solids, half-faces, extremely open or close-marked partis), but
these dogs can and do contribute to the breed from the whelping box.
I think merles can also contribute to the breed. My merles have
excellentdispositions and exhibit correct breed type. I believe that
the merles I am
producing are as sound and healthy as those of any other color Cocker
from my kennel and that these merles have the ability to promote our breed
as
public examples of loving pets and/or as outstanding performance dogs.
And while many of you may not want to face it, the day is coming when acceptably
colored dogs from merle lines ARE being shown and finished! As
has been mentioned repeatedly, something like 85% of show lines are ALREADY
behind
the merles being bred today! How long do you really think it
will be before someone finishes a tri, a black/tan or a brown from merle
bloodlines? (I
think it only fair to point out that I am only one of SEVERAL breeders
on the show lists that have and breed merles.
You also say. "There are not that many pet family buyers out there."
Again, show breeders are a SMALL minority of the dog world. There
ARE that many pet buyers out there! And not only buyers, but pet
breeders as well.
The reason the show world cannot hope to remove merle dogs from the
breed is BECAUSE of the number of pet people involved in the breed.
They may not be
members of ASC or at a show every weekend, but these "pet" people are
everywhere and to a great extent, they are the ones in control of the breed.
Just look at the merle situation and try to deny it - 25 years ago
a USDA kennel produced 2 litters of merles. From those TWO litters
of pet puppies,
we now have thousands upon thousands of AKC REGISTERED merle Cocker
Spaniels. This is just ONE line of "pet" Cockers that was started
25 years
ago. Try to imagine how many other "pet" lines of Cockers exist
today and the number of Cockers represented by these numbers. It
is a staggering
number! (Just look at the number of "pet" litters advertised
on the internet and in every newspaper across the United States every week.)
This huge group of Cocker owners and breeders are not freely allowed
to joinASC (without sponsors and being voted in), thus they are not allowed
to
participate in the decision making processes of this club. Most
of these owners also do not show their dogs. Yet the majority of
the show world seem
to believe that this huge majority of Cocker owners and breeders should
meekly follow the beliefs and guidelines of the minority show crowd.
How
screwy is that? Why do show breeders assume that they have the
right to decide that their opinion on Cocker coat colors and other breed
issues is
the only opinion that matters? Show breeders are NOT the
only ones affected by these decisions and show breeders ARE the minority
within our
breed! Again, we must respect EVERYONE's right of dog ownership
and
breeding.
Another comment that I must disagree with was: "it is not a issue worth
fighting". Well, I guess that may depend on which side you happen
to be on! LOL Personally, I think that all of my rights are worth
fighting for. I
also think that if I do not stand up for my beliefs, then I cannot
expect anyone else to respect my choices. (If I don't believe in
something enough
to fight for it, then why would I be doing it?)
I also disagree with comments that: "Many breeder are being hurt personally
by their show stock being bred to merle's against their
knowledge." I'm sorry, but I find this a ludicrous accusation.
If someone sold a dog with full registration, then they accepted the risks
that go
along with that choice - i.e. the dog being bred in a manner that is
inconsistent with their beliefs. If a breeder sold a dog with full
registration and someone bred it to a merle, then how is the breeder
at fault? How is the breeder hurt? Will the Cocker Police come
knock on the
breeder's door and give him/her a black eye? Would the breeder
be "hurt" because someone else questioned his/her decision to sell a dog
as he/she saw
fit? Good grief, if a breeder isn't adult enough to stand up
and say I sold my dog and that was my right and it is NOBODY else's business,
then that
breeder needs to quit breeding! And/or quit selling dogs with
full
registration!
Someone somewhere is ALWAYS going to disagree with what someone else
does.
If you (the breeder) have "friends" in the dog world that choose to
berate you for where or how you sold your dog and you are willing to take
this kind
of crap, then that is nobody's fault but your own. Don't blame
the dog buyer if you aren't capable of making adult decisions and living
with the
consequences. As has been repeatedly stated, about 85% of show
kennels have dogs in merle pedigrees. If you don't want your dogs
bred to merles then
make this a stipulation of the sale or don't sell dogs with full registration.
Another comment I'd like to address is, where many have said: "Out of
respect for those who paved the road for us to own and show and with
luck and success breed our own show litters it is a disgrace! It is
not fair to the builders of the breed to have their pedigree mixed up in
this crap
and you all know this is true." Again, you are entitled
to your opinion,but I don't know anything of the type. I think the
builders of the breed
would be happy to see such happy, healthy, beautiful merle Cockers.
Personally, I think it would be a disgrace to allow a small percentage
of the Cocker world to railroad a color down the drain when there is absolutely
no PROOF that merle is not a naturally occurring color within the breed.
Many of those you speak of with such respect fought long and hard for
what they believed in and I'm sure there were many that considered their
choices
a "disgrace". Many other breeders of today have and still are
fighting for what they believe is right. We ALL have the right to
fight for our beliefs.
If you choose to add your name to the list of those that would like
to spay/neuter all merles, then that is your right and I will respect your
choice. However, I also expect you to respect my decision to
fight for this
color to be recognized and for these dogs to be correctly registered
I don't get why it's assumed that something 'must' have been mixed
in. Some dog somewhere was the first right? Some dog somewhere at some
point had the gene just 'pop up' in order for the first merle ever
to be born. (whatever the breed) If it happened once, it can certainly
happen at random down the road. Just like everything , it's a political
control issue. ASC knows all of this, and unless it starts hitting them
where it hurts (the pocket!) they're going to stay stubborn as mules.
If everyone that really wants merles to be allowed as a pattern
(and were also members of ASC), dropped membership (stating clearly the
reason WHY they dropped it, and stating clearly that they will NOT
re-join until this is accomplished ) ASC would get nervous. If everyone
that wants merles allowed boycotted AKC as well, and started registering
with other groups (also stating in writing publicly and privately to AKC
the reason they stopped using them) well then....AKC would get pushy with
ASC and they would be hit from both ends. Unfortunately both AKC and ASC
have their members by the you know what's, and to do any of this the individuals
would suffer as well. No AKC shows for one thing,,,,,harder puppy sales
without AKC papers,,,,persecution by other breeders that simply don't like/want
merle cockers and on and on. Maybe even a little public
ridicule aimed at ASC/AKC?? Perhaps turning the tables on them by making
it clear that the problems that they associate with merles are cause by
THEM and NOT by people who breed them. There will always be breeders that
just don't care, but the majority of problems are caused by people who
don't have a clue what they have, which is a direct result of THEIR refusal
to recognize merle, and not a result of the breeding....and on and on..
.......you don't believe ASC is stupid, but I disagree.
Merles are not going to go away and refusing to address the issue is a
stupid and childish reaction. Merle breeders do not need ASC to "validate"
our dogs. They are recognized and registered by AKC and as registered
members of the breed they are entitled to inclusion within the breed.
Period. End of story. Unless or until ASC or someone else PROVES
these dogs are not purebred (and thus not eligible for AKC registration)
then they are ENTITLED to inclusion within the breed. (Frankly, if
I'd been an attorney and had some spare time and cash, I'd have sued the
pants off of ASC when they posted the Sheltie or Border Collie or whatever
it was on the ASC site and declared that "if your Cocker looks like this
it is not a purebred Cocker Spaniel.")
Since merles are recognized and registered with AKC as American Cocker
Spaniels, they need to be registered correctly to avoid health problems
and to preserve the integrity of the stud books. As for the color
registration chooses of merle breeders/owners, blaming merle breeders/owners
for incorrect color registrations and claiming they should be excluded
because they "lied" is ludicrous. ASC is responsible for the
availability and/or lack of color choices breeders are given. (What
about all those blues registered as blacks? Mis-marks registered
as partis? Roans registered as black, brown or red/whites?
Sables registered as buffs? Should we throw all of these dogs out
as well?) How about the fact that AKC is often the one to decide
how merles are registered? Is AKC "lying"?
AKC registration rules state that owners should choose the color that
most CLOSELY resembles their dog. They also stipulate that NO dog
will be refused registration based on color alone. Again, merle Cockers
are duly registered members of the breed and are entitled to registration.
Most merle breeders register their dogs as their base-coat color.
This is the CORRECT way to register these dogs. The only thing
that should be changed is that ASC should add merle as an acceptable marking
for registration. .......
Why don't we open ASC up for anyone to join (no sponsors, voting or
other BS), make it JUST for American Cocker Spaniels and then let the membership
decide breed issues. Voting to acknowledge ALL known colors/patterns
could be done on-line for next to nothing by using membership numbers.
Instead of a politically corrupt, elitist country club, why don't we embrace
a breed club that actually represents the ENTIRE breed, not just the 2-5
percent that show dogs? I bet this type of breed club
could do more for the breed than a couple of shows a year that are tailored
around a small minority!
In summation, merles and many other colors/patterns exist within the
breed and are not being registered correctly. Yet ASC promotes the
premise that ALL duly registered members of the breed should be properly
registered in regards to their color/pattern. As the parent breed
club for American Cocker Spaniels and the entity responsible for providing
color registration choices in conjunction with AKC, ASC has a responsibility
to ensure that correct color choices are available to ALL American Cocker
Spaniel breeders. This includes ALL known colors/patterns outside
of those presently listed as appropriate for registration.
Without definitive proof that merles are not equal to and deserving of
the same registration privledges as presently accepted colors/patterns,
there is no excuse for ASC to withhold correct color registration.
Instead of sponsoring another show, maybe ASC should concentrate on cleaning
up its act and doing something to actually benefit the breed!
|