The point I'm trying to make is that blue and fawn dobermanns are a recent addition to the standard. People had to breed 'outside' the standard in order for them to be accepted. Are you saying they were wrong? It seems odd that you are saying, it's on the standard so it's acceptable but I would have condemned them for doing so up until the time the colours became accepted.
As to wrong coloured poodles, there was someone who bred black poodles and occasionally a cream would crop up, she pet homed them as 'wrong' because she didn't like the colour.
Each breed standard has a fault clause as follows;
Faults
Any departure from the foregoing points should be considered a fault and the seriousness with which the fault should be regarded should be in exact proportion to its degree and its effect upon the health and welfare of the dog.
This to me says a colour fault is of a considerably less serious nature than a constructional one.
Becky

Additions to acceptable colours do happen around the world, sometimes causing a breed `split`, [ ie Alsatians, white being accepted in some countries including as a `separate` breed and being given or awaiting equivalent KC status in other countries ], sometimes not, [ ie Dobies ].

If breeding out of colour poses no health risks, whether deliberately bred or a `mismark` in a `standard` bred litter, I can`t see the problem as far as the dogs themselves are concerned.

If breeding out of colour to fool people into thinking a dog is `rare` therefore more desirable [ iow to line the breeders pockets, a common byb trick to fool the gullible ], then I would be against that.

If breeding out of colour but the results, [ so long as health is not affected ], are a part of the breeds existing history and its just the colouring which some snooty pleb with the political breeder / KC power to create a `standard` who was born when dinosaurs were around and that pleb just did`nt like a particular colour or marking type so decided they were `lesser` dogs way back when so that todays dogs of out of standard colours are excluded from the ring because of such a bias, well thats a poor reflection on the Standard makers/keepers, not the dogs or those who oppose such a fickle, out dated, and limiting way of thinking.

If dogs are mismarked / wrong colour but are examples of excellent health and conformation, [ with no colour related health issues obviously ], then excluding them from the genepool makes no sense to me given that colour should be the least consideration in any breeder truly wishing to improve the *health* of a breed.

If there were a lineup of dogs at Crufts which were the right colour but had, [ hereditary ], conformation faults are they the best of their breed just because `wrong colours` were not allowed to compete with them ?
I think not, not if there are `mismarks` with no conformation/health faults which should be considered superior physical examples.

Looking at a hypothetical, [ I do like hypotheticals ] :

There are four dogs left in the world of a breed called Thetical Drinking Dog.

Two males two females.

Two are `right colour`.
One of those has an undershot jaw, the other has poor hips, [ inherited in this dogs case ].

The other two are odd colours, [ out of TDD Breed Standard ], but are as near perfect for conformation and good health as it gets.

Which should be bred from to continue the breed....






**Just to make clear, I`m responding to the topic for what it is, because its a very interesting topic, and not from any angle as a breeder nor to encourage it whether for colours or not, I dont breed, never have, never will, I am rescue all the way, and for those who don`t know I have three dogs which are deaf through colour related breeding stupidity by their breeders, [ deaf white collies ].
IOW I am looking at the topic purely through the dogs eyes so to speak, not through human `preferences` of whats a good / acceptable breed standard or not, but whether colour alone is a good enough reason to consider any dog `lesser` than any other so long as health of that dog is of utmost importance.



I think I`ve had too much caffeine

How recent? 10, 20, 30 or 60yrs?

Yes thats exactly what I am saying, why would you WANT to breed a mismarked dog when they are not accepted for showing (which is what you say you want to do) are you wanting to do it because you think they are "rare"or would command a better price? I do not understand your thinking on this Becky, you had a blue Schipperke you said you were going to breed those, and these Poodles too,I know you have a facinaiton for unnaccepted colours, but you say you want to exhibit dogs, so, why would you do it knowing you stand no chance? It puzzles me (not difficult, especially on a Saturday )


I agree, but I come back again to the point of showing, which is what you said you want to do, so you are in direct contradiction of the breed standard of the breed you want to exhibit.
Dawn.

(Good debate Becky )

A Standard Parti Poodle is currently doing very well in the show ring over here. She has been placed above solids and infact got a RBOB at one show under a CC giving poodle judge!
I'm sure her owner wont mind me posting a piccie of her here


and if you want more recent history on wrong coloured dogs, a brindle basenji became a champion, that's right was awarded 3 CC's by 3 different judges BEFORE the colour was accepted on the breed standard. Clearly not everyone is narrow minded and there is more support for non-standard coloured dogs than people believe, it's just that some people wont rock the boat, like all those people who docked because they showed not because they agreed with it!
Becky

If I could chip in here ...

Whatever Becky's reasons for importing this Poodle, I would hope that breeders (if not judges) could see past his non standard colour, and assess the potential good he could do for the breed in other respects.

Surely every opportunity to introduce new bloodlines (assuming they are of course) to the UK population should be seen as good for the breed.

The constraints of the showring may not allow this colour to win but this is a matter for the showring only. Most pedigree puppies don't get to be show dogs anyway, and to base selection always on showring criteria is not in the best interests of the breed as far as health is concerned.

Cooper is indeed completely new bloodlines as he is almost completely tan pointed pedigree apart from one apricot and he has brown and tan ancestry too.
Becky

You can show me all the pretty (not) pictures you like, you are breeding such dogs becky because you have a penchant for "wrong" coloured animals, I dont know what happened to your blue Schipp, but it was a similar scenario then. The fact that the colour is your ONLY reason for doing it leaves me in little doubt of your want to improve the breed at all, as I said its purely cosmetic and serves no purpose in enhancing nor improving the breed. I dont know why some people have to be "different" but as long as I am showing dogs, I will stick to the standards laid down and adhere to them without adding things I like the look of, purely for that reason. Maybe Im old fashioned Becky, i see no need to add things that do nothing to help a breed at all. Just me I suppose, i see no benefit.
Dawn.

What has puppy farming got to do with me not caring about the breed standard? Or did I miss something? I repeat, not everyone cares about breed standards which are essentially a list that dictates what a dog is meant to be...

I like the fact that the Akita and the Japanese Akita Inu are two separate breeds, mainly because they look different and they don't have the same temperament but I love both equally.

Dawn a blue schipperke does not go against the breed standard. However, Bella was being bullied by my other dogs so I had her spayed and she was rehomed, where she's being spoilt rotten.
Becky

Bella, thats the one, Id forgotten, pleased she is doing ok.

My point was NOT about you!

Why on earth would anybody buy a pedigree dog and NOT care about what its supposed to look like? Im sorry I dont understand that.