Merle Pit Bulls

I guess you'd have to see him in person. I have seen him in person & yes, he looked like a purebred APBT. Acted like one too!

But I will say (for what seems like the 1000th time) there are some merles that are mixed. But not all are.

 

I guess its what you are acustomed to seeing, cause he don't look like no PURE bred APBT I ever seen, but he does favor APBTxLepord Cur/Catahola cross that I have seen.
I see you had ALL the dogs down from this dog.
What does his pedigree look like past the first generation?
If you seen the dog, I assume you should know how he was bred past first generation.

 

So what you're going to base your info on is bad pic?

I did not own all the dogs off Dozer. We owned two. One we culled & the other was Cody, the foundation of our merle line. I think there were actually 3 litters by Dozer before he died, but most of the other ppl who got dogs off him were just small time ppl who just wanted a game dog & who certainly don't subscribe to Pedigrees Online!

Dozer was a Blue Bully x Bullyson dog. I believe I do have a little more info on him beyond what is posted floating around somewhere, but I doubt you'd recognize any "big time" names. I know I didn't. But when we bought Cody & his sister, we were just looking for "pet bulls" so big names didn't matter to us.

Either way, I've spent way too much time on the PC today & I absolutely must go lay down. Lord willing I'll read y'all tomorrow. Should anyone wish to discuss anything w/ me privately, feel free to PM me.

 

Here is a pic of my rescue merle.

 

I think that merle is a beautiful color regardless of whether anyone thinks that they are pure or not. I believe that some, not all, of merles are pure. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and if ABK says that he has seen proof that these dogs can be pure thanI believe him. This debate is one that does not need to happen. Everyone believes their own theories, just like if a pit bull is over 60 lbs then it must be mixed. No one knows that ABK has seen, we have no proof that he saw all of those letters but then again, we have no proof that he didn't see those letters.

 

Does anyone have any pics of merles from the early 1900s or any earlier time period? I've read that merle is genetically dominant, and for it to just pop up in the last (what are we saying? 30 years? lost track) seems strange to me. There is a pic of a merle in one of Stratton's books, but I haven't seen anything earlier than that.

On a question of ethics, if the reputable registries no longer recognize merles for various reasons, is it ethical to keep breeding them?

Here's that pic I was talking about, for curiosity's sake:

 

The fact that people are asking does this look like a pure bred pit bull is stupid to me because I've seen so called pure bred pit bulls and even those look like mutts. The only thing we can refer to in able to tell if a dog is pure pit bull is reading the proper pit bull standards. No one person can just say that aint no pit bull because this breed has been twisted and other dogs have been added and crossed to this breed that alot of so called pure bred pit bulls don't even look pure. The discussion about the merle bull dog isn't going to lead to nothing but arguements and bashing and I know no one asked me but that is irritating. YOu can call me what you want but the real people in here, deep down know this is true. I take back what I said about no one can tell because there is real and true dog man in here so I apologize for that but the rest of you can PM me and we can talk there and leave these forums for people who want to learn.

 

On a question of ethics, if the reputable registries no longer recognize merles for various reasons, is it ethical to keep breeding them?

Here's that pic I was talking about, for curiosity's sake:

<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

__________________
Lindsay

***
UWP 'PR' Matrix's I Defy Gravity CGC WDS - Loki (APBT)
Cassanova Di La Primera TT SCT CGC - Jedi (Dogo Argentino)
& the other hair-brained critters

"Do. Or do not. There is no try." -- Yoda

If you take the color off him and paint him any other color, he will look like hundreds of dogs in the gallery, on this site, that are APBT's.
<!-- / sig -->

 

It doesn't make it unethical because the registries don't accept them. It makes it unethical because there are alot of health problems associated with the defect.

 

Guess I need to use the quotes. Originaly posted by Bahamutt. I was merely saying he looks like a lot of other dogs with different coloring. And the defect only come from those, I understand, if they are double breed.



<!-- / sig -->

 

Merle is only defective in it's homozygous (pure) form. But if we wanted to go the color = defects route then we should not breed whites b/c white is connected to deafness. Nor should we breed blues b/c not only is blue a mutation, but it is directly connected to Color Dilution Alopecia. And blacks are out too for that matter b/c black is associated w/ Follicular Dysplasia.

I could go on, but I won't. I feel that the examination should be on the breeder more than the dog. If the breeder is ethical & repsonsible then no defects will be produced regardless of the color of dog being bred.

But that is JMHO.

 

I agree with you ABK. I have a merle and I don't think he is pure, but love him anyway. I do believe there are pure ones out there though.

 

I'm sure it's been said before, but once again. The merle gene is a dominant one therefore there is absolutely NO way for it to remain "hidden" for hundreds of years only to pop out recently in the past 20-30 yrs suddenly & spontaneously. Genetics proves that this cannot happen thereby it occurs from the outcrossing to another breed. I have a firm stance that merle "pit bulls" are NOT purebred APBTs but ratherdogs that just display common characterisitcs. Also, please remember that the Catahoula Bulldog gained much popularity in the past 15 yrs & it coincidentally timed with the outbreak of "rare merle pit bulls".

 

AMEN TO THAT

 

It cannot remain hidden? What about this merle?



This is what is referred to as a "cryptic" or "phantom" merle. The only giveaway to her color are her bi-eyes & almost imperceptable merling on her flank. Because merle needs eumelanin to be expressed, it will only be clearly seen if acting on eumalanistic color (brown or black). Merle will act weakly - if at all - on phaelomelanin (cream or yellow).

Here is another cryptic. The only spots of merling on this pups whole body are the 2 seen on it's tail.




So, yes, even though merle it is an incomplete dominant, it can be hidden, as neither one of these dogs would be thought to be merle by the average fancier.

Once again I would like to stress that I am NOT saying all merles are purebred. Some merles are indeed mixes. But there are merles who are also purebred as well.

 

I don't know about the pup. He looks like he has black markings on the face as well.

 

The black you see on his face is just part of his black mask. His mask was broken up by the white on his muzzle & it left black shading around his face. He also had black "eyeliner."

Here are some other examples of cryptics. I know they're not a pit bulls (they're Aussies) but they're both great examples of a cryptic merle:

 

Just curious~Did either of these dog's have merle parents?

 

Yes, they did.

 

I think that it's a possibility for there to be fullblooded pitbulls that are meryle.How did these other breeds become meryle?So are they mixed too?Anything is possible.Yes I think that it could of started by one breeder because it's called word of mouth.All it takes one person to tell another and another and so on.People talk and things get around fast.Just like when you were in school with rumors.Howard m. did not openly say his dogs were mixed.If he had ADBA wouldn't still be looking for him to sue.People don't think outta the box.People sell mixes all the time for $1000 dollars so I think just let it be.It should be up to the buyer if the dogs worth it,not us.