Merle Pit Bulls

Let me ask what if someone accidently got a meryle than bought one and bred?Is it not possible for meryles to become popular?People think it's mixed because it's different.Anything weird or different than usual gets judged in the world.Just like deformaties.People stare at those of us who have something wrong and judge it.

 

It wouldnt be a problem if people would just ADMIT they are mixed instead of ripping off uneducated people. Other breeds carry the trait for merel that is why they are merle pit bulls do not carry that trait thus SOMETHING had to be mixed in to get the color. and as far as Howard madison goes most everyone knows what he was doing and that his dogs peds were "sketchy" whether he admits it or not. If you had ripped off hunderds of people for hundreds of thousands of dollars would YOU admit that you sold them mutts so that they could sue you ? Probably not

 

Breeding merle to merle can cause deformities. That is a known fact in any breed. Ask and GOOD Aussie breeder they will tell you you never breed merle to merle

 

prettyful: That is exactly what happened. Howard Madison came upon a merle dog. He liked her & so did many others. He ended up breeding the tar out of her & her offspring. He took out ads in every mag he could peddling his "rare merles", thus bringing merle out of the shadows & to the forefront.

You are also right in that anything different is questioned. I remember when Wildside Kennels got several black & tans in their litters & they ended up having to put out an educational page on black & tans b/c ppl were accusing them of mixing their bulldogs w/ Rottweilers.

When blue became popular I remember there was a big stink about them being "mixed" too. Heck, there are even some fanciers still today who think blues are mixed.

Screamer's APBTs has some super nice blueticks & I've seen folks accuse them of having bird dog mixes! lol.

So I guess having anything different & then being accused of having a mix goes w/ the territory.

And as a side note, it's spelled MERLE not MERYLE.

High Voltage: The ppl who won't admit Howard's dogs are mixed are those who bought dogs from Howard. Howard himself openly admitted he could not verify the pedigrees on his merles. That's what gets me about the whole HM thing. He wouldn't advertise he didn't know the peds, but he wouldn't hide it if you asked either. The problem was, no one asked!

 

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=599 align=center border=0><TBODY><TR vAlign=top><TD width=346>
Merle Patterning Gene Identified</STRONG> [Wednesday, March 08, 2006] The AKC Canine Health Foundation announces that Dr. Keith Murphy’s laboratory has published its findings describing the genetic cause of merle coat patterning in dogs. Dr. Murphy is Professor, Department of Pathobiology at the College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences of Texas A&M University and has been funded by the CHF for various projects. The findings are significant in that dogs with merle patterning often suffer from deafness and ocular abnormalities. Therefore, the merle findings will certainly assist future research concerning these canine health issues.

Merle is a pattern of coloring observed in the coat of the domestic dog and is characterized by patches of diluted pigment. This trait is inherited in an autosomal, incompletely dominant fashion. Dogs heterozygous or homozygous for the merle locus exhibit a wide range of auditory and ophthalmologic abnormalities, which are similar to those observed for the human auditory–pigmentation disorder Waardenburg syndrome. Mutations in at least five genes have been identified as causative for Waardenburg syndrome; however, the genetic bases for all cases have not been determined. Linkage disequilibrium was identified for a microsatellite marker with the merle phenotype in the Shetland Sheepdog. This region of the human genome contains SILV, a gene important in mammalian pigmentation. Therefore, this gene was evaluated as a candidate for merle patterning. These data show that SILV is responsible for merle patterning and is associated with impaired function of the auditory and ophthalmologic systems. Although the mutant phenotype of SILV in the human is unknown, these results make it an intriguing candidate gene for human auditory–pigmentation disorders. The patented genetic test for merle is now available through the Canadian company, Vita-Tech which carries out tests for merle in multiple breeds. More information on Vita-Tech can be found at: http://www.vita-tech.com/home.cfm.

The results of this work are published as Retrotransposon Insertion in SILV is Responsible for Merle Patterning of the Domestic Dog (Clark et al.) in the January 31, 2006 issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

 

I thought HM 's dogs were ADBA registered?

 

So there were merle pitbulls but with genetic problems?

 

No, pretty, there ARE merle pit bulls w/ genetic problems. Any dog that is the result of merle x merle breeding will have genetic problems & any dog that has merle x merle in it's pedigree is likely to have genetic problems.

Yes, HM's dogs were ADBA registered. But it doesn't mean the pedigree on them is correct. Heck, there was a dog that was half pit bull & half french Mastiff that was ADBA registered! Of course his pedigree showed him as a pure pit bull, but he was not.

 

oh yes true but adba registered without a ped?or they found out it was fake?

 

I've also heard that froma great dane breeder.

 

And this is the reason why merles are a considered a fault. There is too much potential for things to go wrong. The majority of people that would be breeding merles if it were allowed would not care about whether or not it is a merle x merle breeding or if it has been done in previous generations. It would cause an epidemic within the breed. Eventually these merles would find their way into other lines and corrupt them. It would be a big mess. As I said before, one breeder didn't ruin merles and their chance to be registered. The defects associated with merles are the reason why they are not allowed.
And you can't compare merles to blues. At least blues can be bred to each other without causing the problems a merle to merle breeding can cause.
Even though a merle to non-merle breeding can be safe, that gene is still passed on and can eventually lead to a merle to merle breeding that will cause alot of defects.

 

You are right Tommy in that there is a potential for things to go wrong & there are a lot of ppl who don't care. But that is everywhere in the breed. Look at Wood's Pits, Muglestons, Motor City Pits, etc. Do you think THEY care about the breed?

I don't think keeping merle would have caused an "epidemic" in the breed. It could indeed have caused problems, but so can breeding whites, blues & blacks. Once again - if poor merle breeding practices would cause an "epidemic" breeds like the Dachund & Great Dane would be lost. But they're not.

Despite poor merle breeding practices in both breeds, there are still plenty of happy & healthy merle Dachies & merle Danes from clean lines in the hands of responsible breeders & in the homes of owners who actually did their homework before buying. Now I would like to say again that YES merle x merle breedings will cause problems. But I think you're being a little dramatic about the "epidemic" part.

And yes, one breeder DID ruin merles. I know you think this is not the case, but I must ask - if they were such a health travesty why did the ADBA register them for so long? Before HM's breeding disasters the ADBA happily registered merles. Would they do this if they truly thought merles would destroy the breed? I doubt it. If they were really convinced of merle's danger they'd have banned them from jump street. But they didn't.

Furthermore, isn't the reason for conf. shows to determine which dogs are the best brood stock? If merles were so dangerous to the gene pool, why did the ADBA make a merle a conf. CH.?? If the ADBA thought merle was so dangerous, they should have DQ'ed her on the spot, not made her a champion! But they didn't. Not only did they make her a CH. (& Ace) they were going to even feature her as a Gazette cover dog!

It was only after the ADBA was confronted by angry buyers who had defective dogs that HM wouldn't make good on that the ADBA decided to act. Coincidence? I doubt it.

As for blues, yes they can be bred together, but only for a few generations. If you don't infuse "color" into the line every few breedings you end up w/ dogs that have bad skin & haircoat. Furthermore, not only is blue a mutation but blue it is directly connected to a genetic defect called Color Dilution Alopecia. So both blue & merle are mutations & both blue & merle are directly connected to defects. In fact, both blue & merle are from the dilution family. Blue is a complete dilution gene while merle is an incomplete dilution gene. The only difference is that merle x merle defects will show up right away whereas blue x blue defects take a few generations to show up.

The bottom line is that we should be focusing more on the breeder, not the dog. Many colors/bloodlines have defects. If the dogs are in the hands of responsible breeders, there should not be a problem. Responsible merle breeders do not breed merle x merle or use a dirty line. Responsible blue breeders do not breed blue x blue or if they do, they make sure to infuse color in their lines. Irresponsible breeders like HM, Muglestons & the like should be shunned. Once their puppies fail to sell they & their dogs will gradually fade away...

 

Yeah, it was an exaggeration. However, conformation only provides basis for breeding in show dogs. Conformation plays no part in a working breed as far as breeding is concerned. Unless, of course, the conformation is so poor that it ruins performance. Form follows function.
I disagree with you constantly making it out as one breeder being a problem. On that I guess we will have to agree to disagree. Everything I have seen has shown that merles have potentially more defects than blues or any other color, especially when bred together. I doubt that the ADBA was aware of the potential problems of merles until they saw what was happening with that one breeder. That is why they allowed them for a short time and quickly yanked their papers away from them when they saw what could happen.
There are hundreds (if not thousands) of breeders that are breeding blues with no regard to health. However, the ADBA has not had a rash of people complaining about health problems to the point that they had to stop registering them. On the other hand, this is exactly what happened to that merle breeder. Therefore, to act like blues are no better than merles seems a little foolish. Of course, blues do have problems but you know that a merle to merle breeding can have much more disastrous results within one breeding than one blue to blue breeding. This multiplies the problem.

You mention that Great Danes and such haven't been ruined and they are accepted as merles. You must consider the fact that there aren't going to be thousands of people all of a sudden breeding them with no knowledge of the problems. You have a handful of Great Dane breeders in the US compared to the thousands of APBT breeders and 99% of them really don't give a shit about the dogs.

If HM didn't do what he did and merles blew up in popularity (as they would have), instead of just one breeder producing bad dogs, there would be dozens of merle to merle breeders creating disasters within a short matter of time. If anything we should be thanking HM for bringing it to the ADBAs attention before it exploded and there became hundreds of merle breeders doing exactly what HM did.

 

Good post Tommy.

I agree 110% that there is more potential for defects in merle & that the defects are more severe. But this goes back to responsible breeding. It is easy to avoid defects. Do not breed merle x merle & do not use a dirty line. Pretty simple. But as you said, many ppl don't care.

But should the apathy of other breeders be a cause for prejudice against good breeders &/or good dogs? A good breeder will screen out as much scum as they can & educate potential buyers. Out of the roughly 19 merles I have produced over the years, I have only sold 1 intact. One. All the rest I either kept for myself or sold on spay/neuter contracts.

As for blues, I compare them to blues b/c ppl were saying merles shouldn't be bred b/c merle is associated w/ defects. My point is other colors are too. Merle is not the only color connected to defects.

I agree that the ADBA did not know of the defects until HM began his awful breeding program. Merles had been bred w/ little to no problems until he came along. It is he that started mass producing crappy merles & got the ADBA all stirred up in the first place. The overwhelming majority of merles were being bred in a proper manner until he came along.

I know it's not health - I have owned & bred merles for almost 10 years!! I ran into one defect. One. I only came across it last year & it came from the mother, who was not merle, but black! But HM comes along & the next thing you know merles are going down the toilet & the ADBA bans them!

If he had never hit the scene & if he never had bred like he did & peddled that junk, the ban would have never occured. It all goes back to him. That is why I say he is to blame.

 

Thanks, for actually reading the post instead of jumping all over it.
A good breeder is a good breeder. Personally, I feel that anyone that is breeding for color, is not a good breeder. That is my personal opinion.

Do you not think that is very possible, if even inevitable, that if HM did not do what he did and merles became popular that there would be a surge of breeders improperly breeding merles?
If the ADBA did not see the potential problem beginning with HM and hundreds of kennels began breeding merles, can you imagine how many HMs there would be?
This is not like any other breed. People treat this breed like ATMs. With the amount of people improperly breeding APBTs, it would have been terrible if merles were allowed to be registered.
Think about it. Between the time that HM did what he did and now, there would be so many inbred merle to merle dogs out there it would be ridiculous.

 

I agree w/ your point about breeding for color. But not everyone who has merles is breeding for color. I'm sure as you know merle is an incomplete dominant & as such it does not have to be "bred for."

I do not know if it the downfall of merle would be inevitable or not. Everyone we've known that had merles always knew how to breed them & tended to keep them to themselves. It could be possible they could have gotten in the wrong hands, but the point is moot, they already have & now pandora's box has been opened.

I understand why the ADBA did what they did & I understand they had no choice. I just don't like ppl lumping all merles & all merle breeders in the same category. I am not like HM nor are my dogs like his.

 

That's understandable.

 

Alright i didnt read this thread. But i have a merle but do i think its a pit bull? Nope. My merle is a house pet. I do think that some merles are very nice but have yet to see a nice leaned out merle i dont know why. But i still take pride in my mutt (merle) and am in sliming her down to my likings and will have pics up soon. I dont treat my merle any different then my other dogs she still gets the same love and all that then APBT's do. So that should go the same with all the merle owners. But do not breed your merle's keep it as a family pet.

 

Here is a nice merle if you haven't seen one. I don't know if you'd consider this "slimmed down" but I have had an owner/breeder/exhibitor of ADBA conf. CHs. want to show him. Anyway, here he is:



As for your outlook on merles, I think that is great that you will not a breed a dog which you question it's purity. That shows great integrity on your part.

As for myself I believe that breeding AGAINST color is just as much "color breeding" as breeding FOR color. Either way you're basing your selection of brood stock on color. I have no reason to question the purity of my merles, so if we get a merle & it's a good dog, I will breed it if I so choose, just like I would breed a good black, good red or even a good blue.

I guess I like to think of myself as "color blind", but that's just me!

 

Your merle dog is beatiful!
They have such a unique look. Here is my merle which is unknown parentage.