new to the board

why is that interesting? i will see if i still have the email!!

 

thats truth right there! ^^^

 

lmao ... the ADBA has ALWAYS registered merle APBTs & they openly support the stance that merle APBTs are purebred! The only reason they stopped registering them was b/c of the actions of one bad breeder who could have hurt the health of the breed.

Oh & BTW, I do not know if any of you know this, but last I heard the ADBA will STILL register pups off a merle dog so long as the pup itself is not merle.

For example, let's say I breed my merle male Trey to my black bitch Smokey. Let's say she has 6 pups - 3 black & 3 merle. I can still register the blacks through the ADBA but the merles I cannot.

So why would they do that if merles were mixed bred?

You see, it was only the papers off the merle dog Boham's Venom were revoked. So Venom & all her merle offspring have invalid paperwork. Meanwhile all the other merle dogs should have valid paperwork, meaning their pups can still be registered w/ the ADBA provided they are not merle. This is done to prevent the unhealthy & questionably bred Venom dogs from being registered back into the gene pool through paper hanging.

As for Mr. Colby, I will both agree & disagree w/ what he said.

There are most certainly mixed bred merle "pit bulls" out there. I have no doubt he has seen mixes being passed off as pure.

BUT ... (isn't there always a BUT out there to throw a wrench in things? lol.) there are also merle pit bulls out there who are pure blooded as well. He just may not have met any, b/c during his time they would have been quite rare. But just b/c he hasn't met any doesn't mean they aren't there.

 

1 more question.... you stated in the original post that she was a Budweiser Crusher female, but has a blue dad, and herself is merle

but budweider crusher was a red/rednose

do you have a pedigree so some sense can be made of this?

 

I hope I am not remiss in replying here. Please look over me if I am. But the answer to your question is a simple one jman.

As we all know, blue is simply a dilute of black. As you have already pointed out, Bud was a RRN & many of the dogs who go back to him are RRN as well. RRN is a dilute of red. So most Bud bred dogs are either dilutes or dilute carriers. Cross that to a heavy black line that carries dilute & you can easily get a blue.

 

that makes sense ABK.... but what i was missing on was how the merle came in....
not that color matters in a dog, but it can be a sign of incorrect pedigree
ie. black nose dog registered to 2 red nose parents....

 

You are correct in that a merle "out of nowhere" can be a sign of a hung ped. But a merle "out of nowhere" can also be from a cryptic parent or spontanious mutation as well.

Cryptics as you may know, are simply merles who are phenotypically non-merle but genetically merle. In layman's terms they look non-merle but are really merles who will throw merles.

For example, check out this an interesting test I got found at a Catahoula site while studying cryptic merles.

Study the picture carefully and examine each of the puppies as closely as a picture will allow, then make your guess. These puppies were DNA tested, so I can assure you that the results are accurate.

Now try to be honest and do not peek at the answers. There are no rewards being given, and only a lesson to be learned.



Answer

​

Surpised?

Or in rare cases, they can be result of spontanious mutation. Wreaking Yard Kennels has a spontanious merle in 1999. Neither parent was merle, one of them was black & the other red buckskin. Here are his comments on it directly from him:

When I bred Ripper x Sambella

"I waited on the pups and she was having them one nite at 2am in the morning I was sitting there helping her have the pups. As time went on I fell asleep and woke up in my chair that morning to see a site I have never seen in all over 20 years of breeding bulldogs. There was six Red dogs with black mask and there was one black dog in that litter and then sitting right there in the middle of all of this was the d*mn-est thing I had ever seen.

A pup that was blue in color but spotted blue not solid. He looked like somebody had pinned him on the wall and got some of the deepest darkest blue paint there is and slung it on him as it was in big splotches and then it looked like some body painted under that with a light gunmetal blue solid and he had the deep dark blue patches also in little spots all over his body .

Now if that is not enough as the dog got older he was a deep deep blue in color but that was in the shade if you took him to the sunlight he looked reddish in color and had a reddish tint.

I have seen blue dogs but this one was different and I could not figure it out. I started asking questions and started researching this and to my amazement a man from another country sent me a hand painted painting of bulldogs of nearly 200 years ago and the painting looked exactly like the dog that was in that litter of dogs same color same nearly every thing. He said that what had happen is that in that litter some how some way a gene has come from way way way back nearly two hundred years of breeding to that same very type dog that was called the blue phal fighting dog of nearly two hundred years ago.

Now what are the chances of that? Never seen it before and will never see it again I am sure. The pup died at about five months old for some unknown reason he was healthy as could be but one morning walked out side and he was dead in the kennel for no reason at all.

I myself don't give a hoot what people say about genetics if you are breeding a white like of dogs and there is a black dog in that gene pool some were maybe 200 years ago it makes no difference if that gene come forward them white dogs are gonna produce a black dog . If you are breeding a black line of dogs for 50 years noting but black and there is a white dog in that dogs bloodline some were again maybe two hundred years if that gene come forward you are gonna have a white dog if it connects.

It does not happen often I am sure, but it is d*mn sure a possibility that is for sure. I have pictures of that pup and had people emailing me from all of the country not just bulldog people other breeds of dogs asking about that pup because that pup was never bred for color he was bred for other things it is a difference if you are breeding for color and you are not as to what can happen."

Since neither dog was a known merle & there had been breedings done before & since with both of these animals & no merles resulted, that leads me to believe the lone merle pup in this litter was the result of spontanious mutation. The pup's mysterious death also reinforces this idea, since first generation mutated offspring are rarely long lived.

 

It's interesting, because that's quite a reliable source, and he has been in these dogs forever. So, if he says, that merle isn't a natural color in APBT, chances are he's right. I have heard many people argue against and for merle, and that it probably one of the best sources I have ever seen against it. I would like to hear from more Reliable Dogmen of the past and see if they ever had a "miracle" merle thrown.

"So why would they do that if merles were mixed bred?"
The same reason the UKC registers RE and Gotti dogs as APBT to get money.

 

He may have "been in these dogs forever" & I'm sure he's seen & done a lot. But he has not seen it all & done it all. As I have told many ppl, the universe does not revolve around one certain person & no one - no matter who you are - has seen everything there is to see or done everything there is to be done.

The sad, bad fact of the matter is, the ADBA was registering merles before LC was even born. Yes, he is right in that there are some mixed bred merles being passed off as pure. But there are purebred merles out there too. Just b/c LC never saw them doesn't mean they aren't there. Heck, I never saw a supernova before either, but they're out there.

As for the ADBA registering non-merles off merles for the money, that is simply inane. There aren't enough puppies off them to generate enough income to justify it.

As for dog men of the past, I know TL Williams & Carl Mims believe in purebred merle APBTs. I believe Glenn Wise did too. I don't know if those men are good enough for you, but those are some I know of.

 

To help clear things up, all the Bud in here comes from her Mom's side. Her dam was heavily bred bud. Her sire was blue, and had numerous Cash dogs in him. Like I said, I need to build a ped. I don't know alot about Cash's dogs, other then I've seen some of his dogs show up in peds at RCK, and they weightpull alot of thier dogs.

 

I don't think he's the end all be all, hence the reason I said I'd like to hear what other Dogmen thought. I didn't say, "Well, Colby said it so it's written in stone." I just said that it did bring up a strong argument. I would like to hear if how Tom Garner feels, and if he has ever had the "miracle merle" pop up in any of his litters.

 

Sent an email to Mr. Garner. I hope to get a response. I'll let you all know if I do.

 

Thanks.

 

But have you your self seen a gamebred merle
While LC may not have seen it all, he has seen thousands of dogs not only from his yard, but the yards of most of the great breeders over the last 80 years.
As far as a spontaneous mutation, that implies something from nothing. In other words, just as likely as zebra colored pup pops out. Spontaneous genetic mutation occurs in every living creature in every generation to some degree. Reading that statement from "wrecking yard kennels" makes me think a) merle gene must be ressesive (If it was cryptic then somewhere back in the family tree they would know, that is if they know the history of thier dogs) or b). the whole story is not being told or c). again they don't know they whole lineage of thier line.
Spontaneous, that really seems reaching, I know it is possible, but at what odds???? For the time, I think I will side with LC, who probably has no other agenda other than to make it to his 87th birthday.

 

jean: Sorry if I came off as sounding like LC was the end-all but that's how your statement sounded to me. But I gave you the names of at least 3 other dogmen who seemed to accept merles w/ no problem.

Primo: Yes, I myself have seen a gamebred merle. I owned the dog. He came from Haymaker Kennels in Virginia & was a Carver bred dog.

And yes, I agree LC has seen thousands of dogs. but so have the other respected men I mentioned - TL Williams, C. Mims & G. Wise & to my knowledge, none seem to have a problems w/ merles.

And again, yes, spontanious mutation is quite rare. But it does not mean something out of nothing. Far from it. Only God can create something out of nothing. In merle's case it comes from something. It has been found by a Texas A&M study that merle is a mutation of the SILVA gene.

As for WYK, you can think as you wish. Which ever thought you choose to believe, it does not change the fact that the man had a merle pup pop up off 2 non-merle parents.

The bottom line is this - opinions are like crap holes, everyone has one. Most who speak on merle know little to nothing about it save for what they've been told by a few closed minded ppl who probably don't know anything about merle themselves.

I myself have owned, bred & studied these dogs for over 10 years. Are there some mixed merles being passed off as pure? YES. Are there some purebred merle APBTs out there? YES. Whether you choose to acknowledge the fact they exist or not is up to you, but it changes not the fact that they are out there.

 

No problem. I guess you just read my words wrong. I said chances are he's right, not he is absolutely right. Also, I am still a student to this breed. So, your two sources (TL Williams & Carl Mims) may be great Dogmen, but I haven't heard of them, yet. Also, you state those after I said my comment. It's not like you named those two people, and then I was like "Well, Colby said it, so he must know more." Also, the reason why I would like to know if Garner, FB, Carver, those Dogmen have seen this. Just because they are the ones I have heard of. I wasn't doubting your sources.
Also, since I am still just a student of the breed. I didn't say that there are no merle purebred APBT. I just like to hear arguments for and against. I haven't made a decision yet, which in one of my posts, I said that the Colby thing was the strongest argument, because usually I just heard, "Merle APBT aren't fullbred, because no one ever saw a merle APBT in the past." That to me isn't a good enough argument, because they don't say who told them that they never saw a merle APBT in the past. I hope this clears things up for you...I personally don't like merle on any breed of dog(so it's not like I'd buy one either way), but I will say again, no one has proven to me whether a fullbred APBT can be merle or not.

I have a question for the OP though, how much does your dog weigh? I can't see tell by the picture, the size of the dog. The only other merle APBTs I have seen have been on the bigger size.

 

I guess that's one problem of having convos on MBs. It's hard to catch the person's inflection & tone sometimes & occasionally things get misinterpreted.

Actually, my 3 "famous" men I know of right now (Williams, Mims & Wise) are great dog men. As you grow in the game I have no doubt you will come to know who they are.

As for if Garner, FB, Carver, etc. have ever seen one, I don't know. I haven't asked. But the sticker is, even if they say they haven't they may have been looking right at one & not known what it was. I have seen many old dog men around here call merles brindle, spotted or even pinto. If it is a lightly marked merle, they usually just call it whatever color the dog is - red, brown, etc. I even had a vet call one of my lightly marked red merles a red brindle!

You must remember - not every merle is heavily marked. Some may only have 1 or 2 dime sized spots of merling on their whole entire body. This little guy is a prime example:



The only spots of merling he had on his whole body are the two found on his tail. As such, he's actually a merle dog, but if you asked the average dog person, they'd say he was fawn.

There are a lot of folks who will tell you merle is a "new thing." It isn't. The older men I spoke to around here (no big names, just regular dog folks) said most of those "spotted dogs" were culled at birth b/c of the defects associated w/ them. As a result, merle became rare. And many moon later a color minded breeder in Ohio stumbled across one & he becan pumping out puppies as fast as the bitches could have them. Soon merle "came out of nowhere" & what was once little seen was now seen on every street corner.

As for LC, again I am sure he has seen a lot during his days on this earth & I have much respect for him & his dogs. However I would not consider his opinion the "strongest argument" by far. I myself am more swayed by scienticific studies & eye witness testimony of those who have owned the dogs.

And to the arguments for & against merles, I don't even go there b/c I know there is no winning. The anti-merle camp is right b/c there ARE mixed bred merle "pit bulls." The pro-merle camp is right /c there ARE purebred merle pit bulls. So I do not try to take one side or the other b/c in their own ways, both sides are right.

Finally, I hope I am not stepping in too far here, but I have seen merles of all sizes. I have seen some as large as 80 lbs & others as small as 40 lbs.

 

Jean, my girl probably weighs around 60, havent weighed her in a while. Last time she was on a scale, she was a tad over 55. I'll try to wiegh her tonight and post it if your interested. Also, no word from Tom yet.

 

Seems like you really know your stuff, ABK. You make a lot of strong arguments for merle being a possible natural color...Yeah, I guess the 80lbs. are the Catahoula mixs, and the others could possible be fullbred, like you say...
Thanks GoFurygo for answering and e-mailing TG. That's not too bad a size.

 

Touchy, Touchy , I asked the question because I already knew the answer, of course you have seen them, even owned them as I suspected. I only even replied to this thread because I thought you were being to "closed minded" and too easily dismissing of other members opinions as well as the opinion of LC.
How could I not think this with comments like:

"He may have "been in these dogs forever" & I'm sure he's seen & done a lot" (sarcasm noted)
"The sad, bad fact of the matter is, the ADBA was registering merles before LC was even born"

Only to be backed up by further comments such as:

"The bottom line is this - opinions are like crap holes, everyone has one"

and followed up with this gem :

"Most who speak on merle know little to nothing about it save for what they've been told by a few closed minded ppl who probably don't know anything about merle themselves." (insert LC, or old, or Primo for "closed mined" )

Basically I viewed Loius's opinion on one end of the spectrum and your's on the other. Since he is not hear to play devils advocate to your absolutes (quote by ABK "Are there some purebred merle APBTs out there? YES") I figured I would.

Now ,since you didn't post it earlier, here is a link to the study you referenced
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/103/5/1376?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=merle&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT

I read this about a year ago ( I know, surprising for someone who speaks on merle and is closed minded)
Some interesting tidbits, not once in that study is the word "spontaneous" used to describe the mutations going on. Why? Because spontaneous mutation has nothing to do with it. Here is a short definition of a spontaneous mutation from Northwestern university http://www.biochem.northwestern.edu/holmgren/Glossary/Definitions/Def-S/spontaneous_mutation.html
While my definition may have been oversimplified, I think it is what most laypersons would think of and with a little tweaking is spot on.
The SINE insertion into the Silva gene is hereditary and carried, Not a spontaneous mutation which may or may not be passed on.

Here is an outtake from the A&M study, notice what I put in bold

Characterization of SILV in merle and nonmerle Shetland Sheepdogs revealed a short interspersed element (SINE) insertion at the intron 10/exon 11 boundary. The SINE segregates with the merle phenotype in multiple breeds and is absent from dogs representing breeds that do not have merle patterning. All examined harlequin Great Danes harbored the insertion in either a heterozygous or homozygous state. Described herein is LD with merle and characterization of a SINE insertion in SILV that is responsible for merle patterning in the dog.

This I believe is the crux of the debate and would certainly give ammunition to an Old Timer.
On the other hand, they also stated that an APBT was tested and the SINE insertion was present although segregated. Of course the Old Timer would say they picked a "contaminated" dog.

What LC considers a pure "APBT" may differ from your view and the other big names you dropped, but in my "craphole" opinion is not any less relevant than yours. Old Louie probably has been doing this at a prominent level longer than anyone alive today, and learned from his father JP who was doing this over 100 years ago. What you and I might consider a fine gamebred bulldog even with a little (or a lot) of merle just wouldn't sit right with these guys, I gotta believe that the thousands of dogs they have seen they, they would have noticed a little spot like the picture you just posted, I mean come on!

Again that is just me playing devils advocate, I really don't have a problem with a merle dog, I have always believed form follows funtion anyway. I just don't like the absolutes that get thrown down here all the time

P