Puppy Colours

[Jane S]

I have read that solid coloured dogs sometimes have white marks of varying size on the muzzles and/or toes. it sometimes disappears as the pup gets older. they should not be unduly penalised in the ring except as a final deciding factor between two equally good dogs.

[snapback]161327[/snapback]

I think you've seen this in Jinty Gill-Davies' article on the CSC website? It doesn't actually say that in the Standard though Having said that, it's unlikely very tiny white markings would be penalised too much but a blaze on the head certainly would be as would any noticeable white marking on the muzzle.

Jane

[AmandaA]

Its a hard game this showing thing.
I don't show mine but i keep Len with a lovely long skirt and i think he would do well in a ring. I always get asked if i show him and why not.
I know that their is alot of hard work in showing a dog so for some one to have a pup as a pet not for showing dose it matter that it is mismarked or not.
I think that what 80% of cockers are sold as pets and most of the cockers i see have all their coat clipped of. So the way i see it is that if you are looking for a pet and its a cocker you want then colour is not top of the list.
{don't shot me}

[CooperTrooper]

I agree with AmandaA.
All Cockers are beautiful Cockers, regardless of colour  

[Jane S]

I know that their is alot of hard work in showing a dog so for some one to have a pup as a pet not for showing dose it matter that it is mismarked or not.
I think that what 80% of cockers are sold as pets and most of the cockers i see have all their coat clipped of. So the way i see it is that if you are looking for a pet and its a cocker you want then colour is not top of the list.
{don't shot me}

[snapback]161337[/snapback]

I suppose it depends on whether you think the breed standard is important or not In the greater scheme of things then no, markings are not terribly important to a pet owner & I don't see a problem with an experienced breeder mixing the colours for a specific purpose as long as they know what they are doing & do all the recommended health tests. The problem I have is that so often mixed solid/parti litters (excluding Working Cocker litters) are bred by either inexperienced "just one litter" breeders or commercial breeders, with no health screening (no eye testing let alone Optigen testing, no hip scoring etc). This can be seen by only a quick glance at the KC litter registration records so it's no exaggeration sadly

Jane

[Gilly]

Totally agree Jane  

I don't think colour should be top of the list either, there are more important factors to consider. It's funny though, you don't tend to see experienced breeders mixing solid to parti, but you see it alot with less experienced breeders thats what worries me   I don't consider myself to be "experienced" but I know enough about colour genetics and very experienced breeder friends point me in the right direction.
I don't see the point in producing miss-marked puppies when you can produce good quality parti's or equally good quality solids.

[Cob-Web]

I know that their is alot of hard work in showing a dog so for some one to have a pup as a pet not for showing dose it matter that it is mismarked or not.
I think that what 80% of cockers are sold as pets and most of the cockers i see have all their coat clipped of. So the way i see it is that if you are looking for a pet and its a cocker you want then colour is not top of the list.
{don't shot me}

Not a critisism of any individual but generally -  what concerns me is that there is no NEED to breed litters with a risk of mismarking - there are so many dogs that already need homes    

Breeders that strive to improve their line and have regard to the breed standards home the majority of their pups to the pet market anyway - and there are thousands of accidental and unwanted puppies every year, without adding further puppies that are bred purely to be pets  

COL has really educated me in this; and personally, I would never chose a pup from a litter that had mismarked puppies unless the breeder could explain the reasons why - even though I would be looking for a pet  rather than a show-dog

[Gilly]

Rachel I totally agree with you 100%  

[Cayley]

There are plenty of cocker colours already, experimenting to produce new colours isn't neccessary IMO   .

[Magic Star]

Personally, I would put health & temperament at the top of my list  I guess it also depends how people define "quality"

Edited to add:  The pups is the picture are gorgeous, full of character x

[Colin]

Personally, I would put health & temperament at the top of my list

[snapback]161378[/snapback]

So would I - but is it likely that a breeder that has "accidentally" ended up with mismarked puppies has done sufficient research in the first place to ensure healthy puppies of sound temperament ? It's more likely they've just mated their own two pets, or used a stud dog from up the road.

All Cockers may be beautiful regardless of colour - it's a shame the motives behind the breeding of them aren't always too.

[Magic Star]

Perhaps I don't understand this, but could the "mismarked" colours" just be a genetic blip, does it 100% mean the pups haven't been bred properly?

Edited for typo  

[silkstocking]

Totally agree Jane 

I don't think colour should be top of the list either, there are more important factors to consider. It's funny though, you don't tend to see experienced breeders mixing solid to parti, but you see it alot with less experienced breeders thats what worries me
I don't see the point in producing miss-marked puppies when you can produce good quality parti's or equally good quality solids.

[snapback]161358[/snapback]

Agree whole heartedly with all the above was going to say exactly the same things!!!

[Colin]

Perhaps I don't understand this, but could the "mismarked" colours" just be a genetic blip, does it 100% mean the pups haven't been bred properly?

[snapback]161399[/snapback]

According to a post on the first page the sire was a solid and the dam a particolour - so the mismarkings were predictable rather than an unforeseen genetic blip.

[Magic Star]

According to a post on the first page the sire was a solid and the dam a particolour - so the mismarkings were predictable rather than an unforeseen genetic blip.

[snapback]161435[/snapback]

Ahh thank you Colin, I understand now    The pups are just gorgeous


 

[Jane S]

Personally, I would put health & temperament at the top of my list   I guess it also depends how people define "quality"

[snapback]161378[/snapback]

That's right Emma - this was one of the points I was making really. There are some exceptions but generally those breeders who are striving to improve the health of the breed by eye testing/Optigen testing/hip scoring etc are not the ones who are mixing solids/partis on a regular basis (not in the UK anyway). It does seem that a lot of breeders who say that markings don't matter in a pet puppy also believe that health testing doesn't matter Not that long ago someone with a black pet bitch wanted to use our blue roan dog at stud - after explaining about the probability of mismarkings with such a combination, I asked about the bitch's eye test to be told "I don't need to do that as I'm only breeding pet puppies". Sadly this attitude is not that unusual

Jane