Starting a new thread on this and maybe try keep it educational.

Since we had good luck getting answers promptly from the LRC on another related question in the past, I thought I'd give this one a try.
Just sent this email:

Before the "other color" designation was done away with in the late 70's, if someone applied to register a Labrador as "charcoal" or "champagne".... what did AKC send back for the color on the registration papers for that dog?? Did they automatically assume charcoal to be a black and registered the dog as black... did they automatically assume "champagne" was a yellow, and issue papers for a yellow? If someone applied to register a "silver" using the other color designation before the "other color" designation was done away with, how was the dog registered... was there ever AKC papers issued showing them to belong to a silver?? I realize after the infamous AKC inspection of that litter with silver coloring, the mandate came down to registere them as "chocolate", but before that time... were there ever papers issued for a silver Labrador using the "other color" designation?"


If I get an answer, I'll ask for permission to copy and share.

Who cares what they say!!! This is getting old watching you guys fuss over colors. A lab is Black, Yellow or Chocolate. It is as if you guys have nothing else to do but argue.

Valerie is offering her time and she is always very fair about everything. If she is willing to do the homework I don't think she needs to be flamed for it. If nothing else it can help educate us on how the AKC works and thinks, even if it doesn't help us with the color issue. Val-I hope you ask about Fox Red and White as well!

The pedigrees will still be traceable even if they were re-issued to chocolate after the investigation.

Jack and his silver friends purposely warp these threads and become victims when they bring out our temper. We’ve spent days debating if breeding on pre-limbs or breeding to a fair makes one a good breeder forgetting that nothing Jack has done meets the definition of a good Breeder. It reminds me of a kid who is caught bringing drugs to school and manages to put the system on trial.

Jack is teaching all of us. He’s showing us how these places get our pedigrees, and why people buy a puppy from someone who makes his bitch and litter lay on a gritty swimming pool without a blanket. They are good at making wrong sound right. But knowledge is power and we should be glad he’s being so transparent.

The LRC’s statement about silvers has caused these websites to modify their language - there are now only three colors not four - but puppy faces cut out and put on a little paint strip is a powerful ad and feeds the public’s boutique buying mentality. A statement from LRC on how to find a good breeder and not shop colors would be a start.

The AKC had no tools other than requiring these places to register silvers as chocolates.
But science may give them weapon they need with the breed test. They can and should require DNA testing on all lines going back to the original ‘dilute discoveries’. I think silver breeders are secretly sweating. If and when the weim cross is discovered, I hope they are sued to the moon. Money will talk louder than we can on this forum.

"Who cares what they say!!! This is getting old watching you guys fuss over colors. A lab is Black, Yellow or Chocolate. It is as if you guys have nothing else to do but argue."

Who is arguing?? Some of us are interested in breed history and breed trivia.

"They can and should require DNA testing on all lines going back to the original ‘dilute discoveries’. I think silver breeders are secretly sweating."

I'm not sweating at all and welcome the test as long as ALL labs have to get the test so we can see how many of your Champions have the gene laying arround in there. I have not hi-jacked anything and I know I'm not the victim here. I made the decision to post and I guess I deserve what I get. Now if some of you aren't proud of your actions, you can't blame me I didn't make you type anything.

As far as Pocono, I have already discussed why the pic is the way it is. There is a heating pad under the pool and I tried and kinds of stuff in the pool but the mom wouldn't have any of it. I guess next time I should go ahead and put newspaper or blankets in the pool and let her trample and kill her new born puppies just because people think it is nice for them. That sounds like the smartest thing I have heard in the last two days. Here is your sign!!!

Fox Red is a shade of yellow. White is not a shade of yellow.

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

Valerie is offering her time and she is always very fair about everything. If she is willing to do the homework I don't think she needs to be flamed for it. If nothing else it can help educate us on how the AKC works and thinks, even if it doesn't help us with the color issue. Val-I hope you ask about Fox Red and White as well!

"There is a heating pad under the pool and I tried and kinds of stuff in the pool but the mom wouldn't have any of it."

Jack, you might invest in a "Jonart" whelping box.... we have had very good luck with it even with new moms who want to wrestle their bedding. It's not cheap, but it's been well worth the investment.
The outer walls of the Jonart fit down over the separate flooring piece's perimeter, so it allows you to have a bedding that is cut larger than the whelping box and tucked under the side walls.

Just as dilute yellow is a shade of yellow and dilute chocolate is a shade of chocolate. I realize these are shades but she is looking up what colors, when and how they were registered in the "other" box and mainly how the AKC handled them! Can we please keep this educaional and maybe wait for her to get some answers before we ruin this thread as well.

Valerie, your professionalism & classiness throughout this thread(s) is outstanding!

"The pedigrees will still be traceable even if they were re-issued to chocolate after the investigation."

Never presumed that "if" there were ever Labradors registered silver using the "other color" box (when it existed), that the color designated would be changed after the mandate.
But maybe we will have the answer to that too.

I was more interested in the "other color" designation in how it applied to all descriptive colors... not just silver. I'm interested to know if "when" someone applied to register a descriptive color for a breed that only recognizes black, yellow & chocolate... well, just how did AKC issue the papers when they received such an application??
Would they deem a "charcoal" as black and issue papers for black... heck, maybe they even rejected the application and sent it back saying "charcoal" wasn't an acceptable color for the breed... I don't know! But it would be interesting to know... but then see, I find history and trivia interesting. Skip over it if you're not interested or want to make more out of it than was intended. I asked for educational purposes only.

http://www.thewhelpingbox.com/id2.html

Your right Valerie they are real nice! What size did you buy(48" x 48"?) and did buy the weaning pen as well? How many vinyl liners do you sugest someone buying to get started? Thank you for the help!

Oh my I read this and had to go back and see what happened with the other thread - surprise surprise it's ten feet long.

Val to answer your question the "other" box was checked and silver was written in as the color. AKC had no problems with such a practice and the dogs were issued registrations. Only when the "other" box was removed was the color questioned simply because there was no way to register them. The inspection took place and the dogs were then registered as chocolate. It was thought at that time that silver was a "mutated " form of chocolate. The understanding of coat color genetics through science was not present back then and so the mistake was made.

Every silver pedigree I have ever seen goes back to either Culo or Beaver Creek lines. A silver breeder then did more research and told me that both of these kennels can be traced to Kellogg kennels. Kellogg kennels has bred many breeds for decades including Labradors and Weimeraners.

I know it's semantics but a silver is NOT a "shade" of chocolate. It's a "dilute" chocolate which is very different. Fox red is a shade of yellow whereas "champagne" is a dilute yellow - again very different.

The dilute gene is present in a very small population of Labradors. It is not present in the general population. How and why it originated is not known, however it was cultivated once discovered by inbreeding to produce more dogs of such color. The gene pool has expanded somewhat but it is still very small in comparison to all the Labradors in the world. It is also only found in the U.S.

Tks Sharon!

Thanks Sharon for joining in on the discussion and your input!

But reading below, it doesn't sound like the dilemma about how to register the "silvers" came about after the "other color" box was discontinued.

When I read this from the LRC, it says the "other color" option was done away with after the first investigation into silvers was conducted.


Following credited "Info @ LRC".


The "other" color option on the AKC Application For Individual Registration of Labrador Retrievers was done away with in the late 1970's after the first investigations into "silver" Labradors were conducted by the AKC and LRC. This was done to enforce the AKC mandate that "silver Labradors" be registered as chocolate. It also had the positive effect of eliminating the various descriptive terms such as "charcoal", "jet", "champagne" and "golden" which some creative owners used for the blacks and yellows.

AKC also informs us that the "markings" designation has always appeared on all a
applications for individual registration. It is not to be used when registering Labrador Retrievers, even if the individual has (mis)markings (b/t, brindle, even gray). The Labrador Retriever should be registered using only the primary body color of the individual, even if it is chocolate for a "silver lab".

It is possible for the parent club of a breed to petition the AKC for a change in color selections on the registration application for individuals of a breed. AKC however does retain the right of final decision on such matters.

We hope we have answered to your satisfaction.
Thank you for writing to the Labrador Retriever Club, Inc.

>>Kellogg kennels has bred many breeds for decades including Labradors and Weimeraners.<<

This info has been known for years, and is the basis for what most of us believe started this "silver" business.

Weims and Labs bred in the same kennel.
Weimns are very good jumpers.
Surprise... a "silver Labrador"... AKA: a mixed breed dog, and the introduction of a dilute gene into *some* "Labrador" gene pools.

What these designer color people are ignoring, is that there are world accepted Labrador Standards. Here are three:

AKC:
"The Labrador Retriever coat colors are *black, yellow and chocolate*. Any other color or a combination of colors is a disqualification...... Black--Blacks are all black. .....Yellow--Yellows may range in color from *fox-red* to *light cream*......Chocolates can vary in shade from *light* to *dark* chocolate..."

This Standard gives U.S. breeders their colors. Black. Yellow (which includes only two defining parameters -- fox red and cream) and Chocolates, which have a written parameter of light and dark. Any colors that fall between the parameters can only be termed as being closer to fox red or cream, or light and dark chocolate.

I see no mention of white, silver, charcoal, champagne, or any other color of the day...

CKC:
(a) Blacks
All black........
(b) Yellows
Yellow may vary in colour from fox-red to light cream with variations in the shading ..
(c) Chocolates
Shades ranging from light sedge to chocolate...."

This Standard gives Canadian breeders their colors. Black. Yellow (which includes only two defining parameters -- fox red and cream) and Chocolates, which have a written parameter of sedge to chocolate. Any colors that fall between the parameters can only be termed as being closer to fox-red or cream, or sedge and chocolate.

Sedge is: "any of a family (Cyperaceae) of grass-like plants often found on wet ground or in water." Here is a photo of sedge: http://www.northcreeknurseries.com/_ccLib/image/plants/DETA-346.jpg
Note... sedge is *not* a silver color.

I see no mention of white, silver, charcoal, champagne, or any other color of the day...

The U.K. Standard:
"Colour
Wholly black, yellow or liver/chocolate. Yellows range from light cream to red fox."

This Standard gives U.K. breeders their colors. Black. Yellow (which includes only two defining parameters -- red fox and cream) and Chocolates (no descriptive parameters). Any colors that fall between the yellow parameters can only be termed as being closer to red fox or cream.

I see no mention of white, silver, charcoal, champagne, or any other color of the day...

We breed to *maintain* the breed which was already established, we are not here to reinvent it. We have our color blueprints. We don't need any more architects.

Dian

well said
thankyou Dian

jan Hepper

"What size did you buy(48" x 48"?) and did buy the weaning pen as well? How many vinyl liners do you sugest someone buying to get started? Thank you for the help!"

Yep, got the 48 x 48. I haven't been to the Jonart website since Jonart was sold to the new company, so haven't browsed all that is available now.... the playpen I got for an attachment was by RoverPet at http://www.roverpet.com/ . I got the 2' high since the whelping box is 2' high.
I didn't buy the liner Jonart sells, I just went to a fabric outlet and bought the heaviest piece of cuttable vinyl I could find and cut that to 48" x 48" to fit in the bottom. I know others have found something usuable for a liner at places like HomeDepot, but I can't remember what it was.

Oh please. Jack didn’t write to this forum asking what to do because his bitch wouldn’t let him put a blanket in her swimming pool. How his puppies were kept was not a worry for him. He proudly shared that photo to promote his litter. It only became a problem because JanisG called him on it. We are what we DO – not what we SAY. Anyone that covertly buys a dog, with the intention on producing silver and hides that from the seller is no novice wanting a jump start in the breed.

Criticizing what someone does is not the same as saying their kid is ugly. While he’s been very effective at pulling chains, for the most part people have taken on what he DOES -- few have called names or attacked him personally. I think it’s wrong to do so and said so. It creates sympathy and works to his advantage. But you treating him as if he were a newbie with their first show dog wanting to learn how to do it better is at best naïve and at worst, insulting to those who have tried to defend the breed against these types of marketing and breeding practices.

"But you treating him as if he were a newbie with their first show dog wanting to learn how to do it better is at best naïve and at worst, insulting to those who have tried to defend the breed against these types of marketing and breeding practices."


Okay, whatever you say. But seriously, the obvious difference between you and me is that "I" would help an animal.

I didn't covertly buy anything and I have every e-mail, contract, reciept to prove it. For anyone that wants to see them contact me and I will share, only real people with names that can be verified. If you don't contact me then shut your trap.

I suggest you use your real name if your going to act like you know me or my type. I was actually called out on the Pocono pic last time I posted(months ago), I don't think Jan was calling me out, she was giving advice. It's not like my reason for not having anything in the pool is that crazy, it's apparent that alot of you have the same problem after looking at this thread:

http://pub12.bravenet.com/forum/976632990/show/611796


I have allready proved that I'm taking everything serious, as I have done 4 OFA's in the past couple months. The truth is.... to some of you no matter what I do it won't make a differnece because I have dilutes. And some of you guys would rather let a dilute dog suffer than help a breeder who raises them. That is ridiculous and disgusting! Valerie is right No matter what... it comes down to the dogs, which it is apparent some of you don't care about!!

Yeah, yeah..I know if I cared I would have ALL the clearances... We have been down that road before!

I agree totally with "Breeder". He is pulling your chains and laughing. No different than what actors and rock stars do to keep their name in the public eye. Pathetic. Why do you even bother?

Try to have an educational thread and see what happens. Another thread trashed.

But in closing, someone in the breed a very long time told me sometimes you have to put personal feelings aside for the good of the animal.
Now, do any of you honestly believe you are going to "shut someone down" or change their ways overnight?? There is an animal(s) involved, and if there is any way of making it's day to day existance more safe and comfortable, well, I'm for it and you can insult "me" all you want for that.

And Breeder, I dare you to "reveal" YOUR identify... because when you call MY motives and ehtics into question, you obviously don't know me and THAT is what is insulting.

Good try, you officially lost this thread. It was good while it lasted.

Dian

Thank you for the clear, concise explanation.

I know the LRC says that the "other" category was taken out in the late '70's, but I absolutely remember the "other" category in the early '80's. I suspect that the LRC has guesstimated the timeframe.

I do know someone who used the "other" for a black and tan puppy, listing it as such, and I am as sure as my old memory can recall that it was registered as such. I remember this, because I produced a splashed puppy, and didn't know if I should use the "other" category for it. I know I ended up marking it as black. Gosh what a lovely puppy that one was. Why is it that the mismarks have great type, bone and coat? Darned Murphy's Law !! She made a lovely pet.

Dian

Karen, I didn't start this so don't blame me for being on here. Are you the Karen I e-mailed? If so... there is someone else pulling your chain and laughing and we both know who it is!!!!

Dian, you are quite right--- I remember the "other" category on applications being listed in the early 80's. At the time I thought the AKC must have an all purpose form on which they inserted particulars for each breed!
And yes, those mismarked pups ---in my case, brindled pups--- were the best in the litter and a large one at that, 12 puppies.

Sharon, I didn't realize the initiation of silvers into our genetic pool sprang from the Kellogg kennel. Back in 1970 or thereabouts I purchased a pup from Mayo Kellogg when I was living in CO and went to SD to pick him up. Mayo did, indeed, have GSPs and Weims as well as Labs (all three colors, yellows and chocolates of various shadings). Didn't see any silvers, but then I was focused on MY prospective black pup!

Jack...if I were you I would stick to self education and stay out of this forum, is pathetic the way people treat one another on here....you will never "win" on this forum. I know most people on here that say they "NEVER" bred a dog without clearences is fibbing, especially the "old timers". and if you are an "old timer" you should be able to tell if your dog is sound or not. Displasia shows up very early...if genetic, and all of us "old timers" know this. OFA can be very tricky...you get a person in there not experienced or having a bad day...then your dog could fail. Go back thru the forum and look up remarks from others who have had their dogs tested and had to re-tested. I can call my dogs hips before I even have them done...I KNOW what dysplasia looks like. Weight can have a big influence on a result. I know this is going to raise a bunch of bull but you look up unilateral hip dyspasia on the showdog super site and you'll see what I mean...but you must be experienced.
AND anyone on here that says you can't make money at breeding is a damned lie, plain and simple and if you can't then you don't know what the hell you're doing and before it's over with all of you that scream puppy mill will be screaming when it costs you $10,000 for a breeders license. Do the math folks...OK I'm ready for the blast.......go.

Just give up.... keep in mind that if YOU ARE doing the right thing... than good, but just adding gas will never make it go away.

Curious of AKC's answer though...

We just have to keep educating puppy people correctly on three colors etc...

"Sharon, I didn't realize the initiation of silvers into our genetic pool sprang from the Kellogg kennel. Back in 1970 or thereabouts I purchased a pup from Mayo Kellogg when I was living in CO and went to SD to pick him up. Mayo did, indeed, have GSPs and Weims as well as Labs (all three colors, yellows and chocolates of various shadings). Didn't see any silvers, but then I was focused on MY prospective black pup!"

It's just a theory. The silver breeder I was in contact with has since stopped communicating. He didn't like what he was uncovering since he began under the assumption that silvers were all over the place and being culled left and right, etc. Once he discovered the small gene pool and the questions surrounding the presence of the dilute gene he stopped researching.

I would like to do more pedigree research on silvers however many have pedigrees with "unkowns" when you go back far enough and the people with the original pedigrees are not up for sharing.

If "AKC is the largest and second oldest purebred dog registry in the world. Founded on September 17, 1884, the AKC was formed as a "club of clubs" to promote the sport of purebred dogs and breeding for type and function" (from AKC site) and if a silver lab is non qualifying according to the standard, why doesn't the AKC issue a limited registration or disquaify it from registration? The breed standard comes from parent member clubs, so if the parent member club says they don't conform to the standard, that they are not of type, the AKC shouldn't even register them (calling them Chocolate). If the AKC registers them, they are saying that they are PUREBRED as the AKC's main purpose is to be a registry for purbred dogs. If the LRC or anyone feels strongly that the silver lab is not purebred they should sue AKC for registering them in the first place. At the very least a scientific investigation should be demanded via a lawsuit and silver registration should be put on hold. The credibility of the AKC is at risk, remember their main goal is to be a registry for PUREBRED dogs. This is their foundation, the core of their existance.

If there was dilute genes found in only silver chocolates that are not found in any of the other colors of labs then perhaps a DNA test should be required to register a chocolate lab to eliminate the silvers. If this was a possibility would breeders of brown Chocolate Labs be willing to submit? I wonder. Some breeders labs might be just a carrier of this gene and registration and desirability of their future pups may be in jeopardy.

Chocolate Labs started out as undesirable and when one occurred it wasn't uncommon to be given away. The popularity of the Chocolates eventually soared and because of supply and demand principles, so did the price. The higher prices brought more breeders into this color. That's what's starting to happen with silvers.

IF a silver colored dog is a lab in-every-way but was found to have genes associated with another serious physical defect (ie. deafness), and I'm not saying it is... or if the silver is proven to be a result of cross breeding, then it should have a limited registration.

If someone determined for sure that the silver is not a result of crossbreeding and the standard changed to allow showing of silvers there would still be some chocolate breeders whinning about only 3 colors, those who have dogs that do not carry the necessary genetics to produce one and get the temporary surge in resulting prices.

New breeds are added occassionally by the AKC. How do you think that happens? Aren't the new breeds actually a result of crossbreeding? What if the silvers were classified as a new breed? Would that make you all happy?

Most 'new' AKC breeds are not new breeds...they are new applications to the AKC from forein breeds or old breeds that have been recently restored. Many of them have been registered with foreign registries for a number of years.
Don't think for a minute that the AKC would allow puggles or Shih-poos to become newly registered breeds.

What would make me happy? Breeding with appropriate clearances. Show me a silver breeder that does Optigen. Or one who does permanent OFA clearances (not prelims) on all of their breeding stock. Or one that CERFs annually. Then I'll be happy. I promise.

Monday morning, no reply from LRC as of yet. Maybe they are researching with AKC for the answers. If/when I do get any info though, I'll ask permission to share here for those who were interested.

Got a very polite email from LRC. Although I believe they attempted to answer to the best of their ability and resources, they suggested when it comes to AKC matters, the questions should be addressed to AKC for a definitive answer.
Last time I tried to get a trivia/breed question answered by AKC, I was asked if I was willing to pay $45/hr research fee, so I don't think I'll be calling AKC.