Finally....puppy pictures Aria/Filius - Page 5

Thank you all. Some great information and even better thoughts. 

Abby, thank you. I'm so sorry for what you've gone through. It was just awful, unspeakable, really, and I'm glad to see you posting again. 

Susie, exactly......."wrong" color is NOT worthy of "devastation". People like that must not have "real" problems. 

What should I have done? Just take pics of the "regular" 5 and pretend these innocent blue pups who have no idea there's anything "wrong" with them never existed? Give them away on CL for nothing but a promise they'll never tell anyone they got them from me? Dump them in rescue? Sell them for $4,000 to some moron willing to pay for rare, non-standard colors? Paint them? LOL. 

All the number of blues tells me is how dishonest so many breeders are. If the genes were really bred out, they wouldn't pop up so often. Instead, people don't select against it, and just kill the poor little guys at birth.........swept under the proverbial rug. Yuck. 

 

Seriously people, with all the expectations for this breed, is there really anyone out there who would refuse to make a breeding that could be a very good one because there might be blues or livers? Are you kidding me? Bucket the "off colors"? Hide them away? Seriously?

Uh, yeah, Blitzen, I think there are. I was actually asked on another thread  "why anyone would breed that combo."

In general, the ignorance surrounding blues is astounding. Apparently, they don't happen to "reputable" breeders who keep buckets right next to the whelping box. 
 

Very cute pups and nice that you are honest about the blue color.

I don't know much about genetics and the way that they work but I was wondering would all the puppies from the litter now have the potential to carry the blue gene, or would it just be the pups that are actually blue?

So, does that mean that every one who has not had a litter containing blues, is guilty of drowning pups? Is that what is being implied here?
Does that mean that before this litter was born, you never had any blues because you drowned them? SMH.

WTH? Joan? Uh, I hope you're joking with those "conclusions" if I may call them that.  Those are some wild leaps. 

BahCan, it's a recessive, like anything else. They can inherit it just like carrying for black, or for coats, or whatever. I think GSDLineage posted the "general" statistics saying something like a quarter of them will be "normal" colored carriers.

Of course, genes never work like that, but you can apparently test for it. I don't see the big deal, certainly not enough to test for and select against. One more stupid reason to bottleneck the genetics of the breed. Like I said in an earlier post and Susie said as well, LOTS of GSDs aren't "breedworthy" and for much worse reasons than color. I wouldn't choose not to breed a great dog simply because s/he produced blue. If you really want to avoid it, breed to a dog who doesn't carry it. Easy! There are people breeding epilepsy, Mega-E, auto-immune issues, etc. and doing so with a clear conscience because the parents didn't seem to be affected but they know damn well it's there.  No one knows blue is there until it happens, and frankly, If blue is the worst thing to come from a breeding, I say you're ahead of the game!  While they shouldn't be the AIM of a breeding, to me, they're an acceptable risk, whereas, say, Mega-E is not. 

Apparently, they're pretty heavily rooted in DDR lines and showlines...neither of which I breed much of, hence my surprise.   Aria had a sister a while ago (out of Ron vom Ludwigseck) who had blue pups, but she was bred accidentally, and the assumption was that they weren't GSDs and it was a dual-sired litter. I never saw them; they were outside the USA. Now I can say I'll bet they were GSDs, lol. Oh, live and learn........

Thanks for that answer Jen...I pretty much said the same thing as your answer in a topic earlier this summer that I would not waste a great dog simply because it produced blue.
 

First of all, congratulations to a healthy litter. It is always a great thing when puppies do well and are fat and chunky and all the above.

Just because people don't post their off color litters on international forum, is not an indication of killing them off. Yes, some do, did and will do... but many don't.
If I knew a litter would produce blues, I would not breed it.If I had a litter that produced blues or livers, I would not repeat it either.  just like I would not repeat breeding that is missing teeth, testicles or falls out of standard in any other way.

Please don't make it sound that all breeders kill off colors..cause they don't.

Again cute puppies, I am sure they will make many families very happy owners.

Cheers.

Martina

 

Martina, You have a much better way with words than I do. That is what I meant, Jenni. And I am also happy your pups are healthy and doing well.

The world is larger than the PDB. I was in no way referring to "posting" them here or "not posting" them here. When I talk about "sweeping them under the proverbial rug", I was mean that many "well bred"  European-bred blues are killed at birth, and many more are hidden and not acknowledged and no one ever knows certain pairs produced them. The other pups are bred, may produce more blues, same thing happens, and we keep the blue genes in the pool while pretending they're not there. It's silly. 

My German friend told me that his friends in Europe were shocked that Americans can even sell blue pups; they assumed we all just killed them like they do because no one wants to own up to them. Let's face reality; there are many places in the world that "off" pups are killed. 

While I'm at it, I'll keep pounding nails in my coffin (never have been good at knowing when to quit...) by saying if we keep going the way we have been, where secret problems get perpetuated by unscrupulous people hiding them, but anything someone can see that is "wrong" is a no-no, it will lead nowhere, in my opinion, but to a shallower gene pool. Color production, imho, is not enough reason to remove a healthy animal that brings value to a breeding, from the gene pool. It reminds me of the people who will only breed OFA excellent, or only breed DM N/N. All breeding is a compromise and a compatibility exercise. There are no perfect dogs or perfect matches; it's give and take and judging the lesser of evils, more often than not. I know I have a different opinion than many, but I think the wrong color, with NO health problems, is an acceptable risk, far more acceptable than perfect LOOKING pups who have first degree relatives with Mega-E, epilepsy, etc.  

To clarify, I would certainly disclose that Aria carries for blue, now that I know it, if I were to sell her or something, but going by the stats, then a whole bunch of Ron's offspring and others carry for it. Just carrying blue, imo, is not a reason to never breed a dog again. Just breed to a dog who doesn't carry it if it's a big deal to you. I'd certainly not intentionally try to produce blue pups, but if the BEST match for her carried for blue, and that was the only downside we could find in the potential mating,  I wouldn't settle for a lesser dog who didn't carry blue, if that makes sense. I'd go ahead and chance a couple blue pups cropping up.  We already know not every pup in every litter is going to be breedworthy, we just don't usually know it right off the bat.