DUTCH kennel club bans breeding “SILVER labradors”

RAADAR11

SCREENSHOT FROM Raadar, the online newsletter from the Dutch Kennel Club: edition march 2016; scroll down to page 11. https://www.houdenvanhonden.nl/globalassets/raadar/2016/raadar-maart-2016.pdf

After the Keeshond, the Weimaraner and the French Bulldogs, the Dutch Kennel Club and the two Dutch Labrador Clubs have signed an agreement to ban the breeding
OF non-recognized colors in Labradors . It concerns the silver color variety.
The two Dutch Labrador Clubs have indicated that the color silver Genetically does not occur in Labrador. To get the silver, other breeds musthave been crossed. This
method of breeding in order to create a desired color, it is
unaccaeptable to the Dutch Kennel Club, and the two
breed clubs (NLV and LKN).
Risk
The risk of allowing to breed non recognized
color is that one focuses on certain colors
breeding. So instead of broadening the gene pool
you are going to select individualsl on certain colors and
not on a physical beautiful and healthy dog, in which color
does not matter. For example, we look at the Labrador
“Silver” is specially found and that there bred
can become. Now, not this color is related to and Labrador
if you’re so focused on that color, you are actually doing very
combining related animals. The color is clearly
probably due to the interference by one or a few
Weimaraners. You can select this color
compare the popular sire effect, including the
offspring weather will be crossed with each other.
Ban by April 1, 2016
To this covenant is closed above reasons. Since
April 1, 2016 should therefore no longer breed with this color
be. To measure the Covenant also
effectively implement the KC’s management will check the
colors of the male and female in the forms from April 1
2016 .
This breeding ban is partly due to the Fairfok project plan,
aimed at a healthy and social pedigree dogs in theNetherlands.

Jack Vanderwyk,
MARCH, 2016

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

ALL DILUTES COME FROM TWO KELLOGG’S DOGS

kelloggsscheme4
Yes, it’s true. All known dilutes in the whole world descended from only two Kellogg’s dogs.

These are the latest results of the dilutes research in the LabradorNet Database.
There is a total of 2471 dilutes in the database, of which 2454 (99.3%) are verified to be descending from the following dogs:
– Kellogg’s Kernel (6/19/1961)
– Kellogg’s Nick (3/19/1953)

The following combinations took place:

– Kellogg’s Kernel x Kellogg’s Dode (Code HS-11 “Silvertone Lotto Route”)
– Kellogg’s Kernel x Kellogg’s Jean (Code HS-12 “Queja Culo Route”)
– Kellogg’s Kernel x Kellogg’s Stomper (Code HS-12 “Queja Culo Route”)
– Kellogg’s Kernel x Kellogg’s Belle (Code HS-13 “Lankas Labs Molly Route”)
– Kellogg’s Nick x Belle of Monterey (Code HS-15 “Beavercreek Route”)
– Kellogg’s Nick x Belle of Monterey (Code HS-16 “Culo Alex/Ducks R Gus route”)
– Kellogg’s Nick x Belle of Monterey, via Kellogg’s Black Queenie (Code HS-17 “Extinct Dilutes Route”)
Note: Code HS-12 is divided between Kellogg’s Stomper and Kellogg’s Jean, because Kellogg’s Jean is Kellogg’s Stomper’s dam. Most HS-12 dogs descend directly from Kellogg’s Jean, whose sire is Kellogg’s Nick, so Kellogg’s Nick is Kellogg’s Kernel’s father-in-law. It’s a small world.

Numbers:
13 dogs are in the HS-11 code.
1990 dogs are in the HS-12 code.
75 dogs are in the HS-13 code.
560 dogs are in the HS-15 code.
293 dogs are in the HS-16 code.
39 dogs are in the HS-17 code.
The mixtures:
Not all dogs are only descending from one single Kellogg’s dog. The following 541 mixtures took place in the past two decades:

HS-11 / HS-12 : 1 time.
HS-11 / HS-15 : 1 time.
HS-12 / HS-13: 34 times.
HS-12 / HS-15 / HS-16 : 81 times.
HS-12 / HS-15 : 209 times.
HS-12 / HS-16 : 140 times.
HS-13 / HS-15 : 12 times.
HS-15 / HS-16: 36 times.

We can see that the Queja Culo / Amber Ray of Beavercreek combinations were the most popular, followed by the Queja Culo / Culo Alex combinations.

It seems that 17 dilutes of the 2471 dilutes in the LabradorNet database do not descend from the Kellogg’s dogs mentioned above. I doubt that very much. These 17 dilutes’ parents are unknown to me (for now). Only two parents missing will break the link between ancestors and offspring. I’m very sure that these 17 dogs also descend from Kellogg’s Nick, Kellogg’s Kernel, or probably both.

99.3% of all dilute “Labradors” in the LabradorNet Database, of all known dilutes in the whole world, are descending from only two “Labradors”: Kellogg’s Kernel and his father-in-law Kellogg’s Nick. If I would have set my mind to the nearest Kellogg’s dog in the database, I could just have picked one out of the hundreds of Kellogg’s dogs in the database, but the problem would be that the 2471 known dilutes in the world wouldn’t all lead back to this randomly picked dog.

They did (do), however, lead back to Kellogg’s Nick and Kellogg’s Kernel. Both dogs were owned by Mayo Kellogg and his parents. The Kellogg’s family were commercial dog breeders since the 1920s. Mayo Kellogg started to “invent” the “pointing Lab” when he was eight years old. It took him forty years to complete this task, with only a few side effects: a couple of dogs who were excellent pointers, but kept looking like Weimaraners, no matter how many purebred Labs he crossed them with, in many dog generations.

The dilutes avant-la-lettre weren’t extremely popular in the Labrador world, not even in the Field Trial world. Mayo Kellogg crossed the offspring of Kellogg’s Nick and Kellogg’s Kernel with some very famous dogs, but only a few breeders were interested in their offspring. Studying the breeding pattern. we see a breeder who is desperately trying to get rid of the traits that are alien to the Labrador breed, and certainly not a breeder who wanted to breed “silvers”. However, he wanted to keep the “pointing” qualities, as the “pointing Lab” was his mission in life.

Mayo Kellogg learned that:
– Silver Factored Chocolate X Silver Factored Chocolate = 25% Dilute Clear Chocolates, 25% Silvers (Dilute Chocolates) and 50% Silver Factored Chocolates;
– Silver Factored Chocolate X Silver (Dilute Chocolate) = 100% Silver Factored Chocolate;
– Silver Factored Chocolate X Dilute Clear Chocolate = 50% Silver Factored Chocolates and 50% Dilute Clear Chocolates.
If only he would have had our DNA dilute test, we probably wouldn’t have any dilutes today.

The genetic probabilities above explain why some of Kellogg’s Nicks / Kellogg’s Kernel offspring was dilute clear. However, only a few of these dilute clears produced offspring that we can see today, as most of this offspring became extinct.

Until 1981 the total known offspring of Kellogg’s Nick and Kellogg’s Kernel was 36 dogs. Thirty-six dogs, after 27 and 20 years. (I can’t say exactly who is responsible for how many, as quite a few offspring was mutual, coming from both dogs.) Thirty-six dogs, of which most of them were deceased by 1981.

But then some of these dogs ended up in the hands of the owners of Culo Kennels, Beavercreek Kennels and Silvertone Kennels, who saw a great business opportunity in “rare silver Labs”. That’s when Mayo Kellogg became interested again. Decent, ethical breeders didn’t want them, and if they happened to have one or two of them in their kennels, they didn’t (continue to) breed them, quite contrary to unethical “business people” such as Dean Crist and Nancy Stading.

Mayo Kellogg started to do something he never did before: mating dilutes to each other to produce silvers, or silver factored dogs.
> 1980: Buck Martens of Kellogg X Kellogg’s Madison Muth
> 1980: Mayo’s Chocolate Drop X Brown’s Chocolate Mitsie Mitsie
> 1982: Kellogg’s Dakota Big Joe X Kellogg’s Taco of Dakota
> 1984: Kellogg’s South Dakota Chip X Kellogg’s Chocolate Jessie
> 1986: Kellogg’s Cooter Brown X Marks Sand Island Buff

Today we know the result of that enterprise: a total of 2471 known dilutes and many thousands of their diluted littermates, bred by hundreds of equally eager and unethical “breeders”, fouling the Labrador population, and all of them coming from only two dogs: Kellogg’s Nick and Kellogg’s Kernel.

No, they haven’t “always been in the breed” and no, they didn’t come from “reputable British breeders”, as today’s main dilute breeders want you to believe. They came from an eight year old boy in rural South Dakota who wanted to “create” the “pointing Labrador”, by crossing a Labrador or two with a Weimaraner, and his mother didn’t stop him.
And no, the offspring of the ancestors of these two dogs never produced any dilute offspring. So the “switch” must have taken place at least twice, during the life time of Kellogg’s Nick and Kellogg’s Kernel, or rather nine weeks before they were born.

These backyard practices would probably have stayed unnoticed outside rural South Dakota if Dean Crist and Nancy Stading (to name a few) would have been ethical breeders instead of unscrupulous “business” people.

Never ever, was the name of Mayo Kellogg used by dilute breeders. They didn’t want their source to be reveiled, and always denied that Kellogg’s dogs had anything to do with their dilute stock. However, when in 2002 Nancy Stading told Dean Crist that she could do with some fresh Kellogg’s dogs, Dean Crist acquired two decendants from Kellogg’s Nick, both grandchildren from Friends Lady Kelleygreen, and bred them. Two puppies were the result of this breeding: Culo Alex and Ducks R Gus. A new Kellogg’s line was born.

In the early 1980s the American Kennel Club (AKC) didn’t want to admit that they made a mistake and they refused to erase the 36 dogs that descended from Kellogg’s Nick and Kellogg’s Kernel from their stud book. They looked at some pictures (early 1980s quality). decided that this was “scientific evidence”, and put quite a lot of pressure on the LRC delegates to agree with them. The result is that there are now thousands of dilutes in the AKC registry, that AKC staff advises owners of dilutes to register their “silvers” as chocolate Labradors, their “champagnes” as yellow Labradors, and their “charcoals” as black Labradors. Because the AKC found it too much fuzz to remove or isolate 36 dogs in the early 1980s, and preferred the registration of tens of thousands dilutes instead, people outside the United States of America who care for the Labrador Retriever breed, are far from happy with the “professional standards” of the AKC and the “agreements” the AKC has with foreign Kennel Clubs.

If this story would have taken place in Kazakhstan or North Korea, nobody would be surprised. We would just isolate these uneducated entrepeneurs and their Kennel Clubs, and that would be it.
But this is America. The land of science and progress. The land of righteousness, which should respect the breed standard of foreign dogs as written by the home country of these dogs, as is custom in the international dog world.

And now some guy from Holland has to show them where these dilutes are coming from.

Jack Vanderwyk,
September 2015

kelloggsscheme2
How do I track a dilute back to Kellogg’s Nick or Kellogg’s Kernel?

If you have a specific dilute in mind, just go the LabradorNet Database, type the first part of its name in the Search box (remove “Muskelunge” first), or pick a dog from the List of Dilutes, and click “Pedigree”.
Follow the “Beware!” cautions in the pedigree, from left to right. You can click the “Beware!” dog on the far right of the pedigree, which takes you to a new pedigree, where you can repeat the previous action, until you have arrived at either Kellogg’s Nick or Kellogg’s Kernel.

In this pedigree of Wiese’s Buckshot you would get to Kellogg’s Nick following the upper string of “Beware!s”, and to Kellogg’s Kernel following the string below.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 2 Comments

BEFORE YOU BREED…

lrc-book

Before you breed, be sure you are a responsible breeder. A responsible breeder of any breed knows his breed’s standard and keeps it in mind whenever contemplating a particular breeding. Lack of knowledge when it comes to the breed standard, correct conformation, disqualifying faults, pertinent health clearances, not knowing what is behind your pedigrees, not having knowledge of strengths and weakness in your lines and how best to compensate for any potential issues, and making excuses for deficiencies in your own dog in any of these concerns is inexcusable even with those whose objective is to merely create “pets”.

Whatever the reason, in the Labrador Retriever breed where we enjoy such deep quality, there is no excuse for breeding an inferior Labrador when the resulting litter only perpetuates more inferior dogs. When you respect a breed, you, as a responsible breeder, do everything in your power to protect and preserve the breed. To make excuses by saying “but” to justify the breeding of a Labrador without regard to the standard and preserving the special qualities which makes this breed unique and special, only displays a selfish attitude and the dereliction of duty to being a steward of the breed. A responsible Labrador breeder’s duty is to breed correct Labradors true to the standard and not make excuses for not doing so.

Betty-Anne Stenmark, AKC Judge and President of the Del Valle KC writes:

“In the purebred-dog world today, the breed standard is sacred and not to be tampered with. In fact the American Kennel Club makes it difficult for a breed parent club to alter the standard by considering changes only every five years. This ensures that the standard cannot be changed to suit the dogs currently running around the home of an important breeder. We must breed to the existing standard, not alter it when it no longer suits us.”

Charlotte Hulett writes:

“So, whatever country you live in or whatever venue you show in, why not obtain a copy of The Standard that applies to your breed, in Your Country, and study it! These Standards were written by people who understood sound structure and movement and who loved this breed. I believe we owe them a debt of gratitude for helping make our breed what it is today: A sound, intelligent, beautiful, versatile animal! Shouldn’t we all, no matter what venue we prefer, strive to continue to breed those qualities which make our breed so special?!”

The Labrador Club statement:

“There is only one breed of dog known as the Labrador Retriever, described by the Standard of the Breed….please remember that there is only one Labrador Retriever breed, one that meets the requirements as set forth in the Official Standard.”

I recently read a disingenuous statement from someone who is deeply involved in breeding dilutes, a condition which has been festering in a few lines which are considered by Labrador Clubs around the world of being crossbred with Weimeraners. The source article involves something the diluters refer to as the “Improvement Movement”. Since the quality of these dilute lines are so inferior, their promoters realized a few years ago that in order for their dilute dogs to even remotely compare to standard Labradors, they needed to inject their stock with the superior, pure Labrador bloodlines. To accomplish this, they use any means they can to get access to breeding with Labrador Retrievers who conform to the standard. Many people, myself included, have had first hand experience with their underhanded methods, going so far as to lie about their involvement with any diluters in order to project an image of respectability and responsibility in the Labrador breeding community. Their statement: “breeders who embrace the “Improvement Movement” are taking every necessary step to combat the original complaints of non-supporters by improving the health, genetics and pedigrees of their dogs” sounds all well and good until you actually think about just WHY they need to improve what they have and what would happen to the recognized Labrador gene pool if the diluters carry out this plan. The diluters openly admit they need to “improve” and the primary way they hope to achieve this is by breeding into the pure Labrador lines of those Labrador breeders who do not breed dilutes. This would result in the inferior genes of their diluted dogs being insinuated into the superior, dilute free bloodlines of those Labradors who conform to the standard and who compete successfully in conformation and performance events.

The statement above somehow tries to describe the long standing Labrador community as “non-supporters”, since we do not condone the deliberate breeding of disqualifying faults, and the dilution of our superior bloodlines by cross breeding with dilute carriers and dilute affecteds. These “improvement movement” diluters more frequently refer to the ones referenced as “non-supporters” as “haters”, “Nazis”, and employ even more disparaging and offensive adjectives when addressing us and speaking about our position in preserving and protecting the integrity of the breed we have known as the Labrador Retriever long before any of us ever heard of a “silver” or other dilute affected dogs which are being represented by the diluters as Labradors.

In 1985 the first dilute affected “Labrador” in the entire world to be registered in accordance with a here-to-fore unrecognized coat color was registered by the AKC as “silver”. This color was unprecedented in purebred Labradors worldwide and prompted a field interview with the dilute breeder by the AKC, whose representative advised the breeder to simply register the dogs as “chocolate”. The rep later admitted that he had erred grievously in this suggestion and regretted his actions. The AKC has since limited the color options for Labrador Retriever registrations to the three allowed “standard” colors of Black, Yellow, and Chocolate. The LRC has steadfastly maintained that any color other than those described in the Standard for the Breed are serious faults and are to be disqualified.

Diluters, however, continue to ignore and flaunt the standard and insist that through their efforts, the AKC standard will be changed to include the alien colors produced by these dilute affected dogs. The diluters maintain fanciful claims of interbreeding with Saluki, SharPei, NewFoundlands, Castro Laboreiro, Mastiffs of various breeds, unidentified breeds of Foxhound and Collie, Border Collie, and numerous other breeds they say are the source of the dilute condition. Continuing even today, unfounded and ugly statements such as, “In fact those breeders had scads of crazy colors born all the time. They just killed the puppies immediately instead of putting them on Facebook.” accuse breeders and the LRC to be guilty of falsifying and destroying records to conceal the longstanding presence of dilute affected colors within the established Labrador breed.

Rather than abide by the standard for the breed which are the guidelines for which all Labradors are to be bred, and which responsible breeders do, the diluters ignore the standard and aggressively pursue their own agenda. The diluters cast blame for the dilute controversy upon what they have called the “new powerful LRC council” reacting to the rising popularity of the dilute designer colors by wanting the dilutes to disappear because the LRC does not “want ‘their’ dirty little secrets revealed in color.”

Universally, the Labrador breed is now, as it has always been, described as being Black, Yellow, and Chocolate. Breeding dilute dogs produces colors which are not, and have never been, described in any standard for the breed in any country which maintains a Labrador stud book or a kennel club. As responsible breeders, our primary duty is to preserve and protect the breed as it is described in our breed standard. Anything less is unforgivable.

Margaret Wilson
ShadowGlen Labradors, reg.
www.shadowglenlabradors.com

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

DILUTE = DISEASE!

dilutedisease1

This is a screenshot of Kristi Jenkins’ dog Bubbles’ (Creeksides Champagne Wishes) test result at Paw Print Genetics. Kristi Jenkins is the Chairman of the CPLR, the organization of dilute breeders. Despite her stating that Bubbles is “a gorgeous dilute yellow”, the test clearly shows the DISEASE TEST RESULTS, and anything not normal at the D locus (Dilute) is considered to be a disease.

Kristi Jenkins tested her Bubbles for the following diseases:

Centronuclear myopathy

Congenital macrothrombocytopenia

Cystinuria (Labrador Retriever type)

D locus (Dilute)

Degenerative myelopathy

Elliptocytosis

Exercise-induced collapse

Hereditary nasal parakeratosis

Hyperuricosuria

Myotubular myopathy 1

Narcolepsy (Labrador Retriever type)

Progressive retinal atrophy, Cone-rod dystrophy 4

Progressive retinal atrophy, Progressive rod-cone degeneration

Pyruvate kinase deficiency (Labrador Retriever type)

Subvalvular aortic stenosis

The Dilute Disease is merely one of the many diseases to be tested. What we can learn from this scientific fact is that:

  1. The Dilute Disease is not normal in the Labrador Retriever. The Dilute Disease is indeed rare, and only occurs in the offspring of American interbred dogs (Labrador/Weimaraner crosses). Since many diseases are rare, next time you desire a “rare” dog, you might want to choose one from the pound, one without diseases, one that doesn’t require daily doses of NuVet as a rule, and has a full double coat and a decent otter tail.
  2. The Dilute Disease is not a “rare color” in the Labrador Retriever. You can easily test the colors of a dog. If I wanted to know if my yellow Labrador carries chocolate (which he doesn’t), then the Genetics Laboratory wouldn’t send me the result as “carrier of the chocolate disease”. The Dilute Disease is a disease which affects so much more than just color; it also affects coat structure, behavior, and who knows what else.
  3. If you are breeding dilute “Labradors”, you are breeding dogs with a disease, dogs with a disqualification. You may say that we “hate” your dogs, but that’s not true. We hate people who deceive the public by advertising dogs with a disease, and mixing these dogs with our healthy Labrador population.
  4. If you don’t know if your Labrador carries the dilute disease gene, have your dog tested. D/D (normal, dilute clear) is the only test result you want. If the test result is D/d or d/d, you should have your dog neutered or spayed, so the disease can’t spread to following generations.

Jack Vanderwyk,
August 2015

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Levers and Pulleys — The Deconstruction of the Dilute Myth

coincidence

 

I respectfully disagree that there is more than one source for the dilute situation we are experiencing today.  The fact that there have been no “designer colors” of silver, charcoal, or champagne to appear in Great Britain until only a few years ago ( and those from dogs imported from the USA who trace back to the suspected line) indicates that the dilute influence on color is not native to the Labrador.

Whether or not the appearance of the Weimeraner is purely coincidental is speculative since we had no DNA testing or micro chipping and breeding records were, and still are, the responsibility of the individual breeder. Could there have been other breeds who contributed the dilute factor? Yes, but the fact that we had no silvers being produced anywhere in the world until after the development of the “pointing labs” here in the USA, tilts the scales, in my opinion.

Please remember, if Weimeraners and Labradors were crossed, you would not see any unusual colors being produced until after the first generation of offspring since the mode of inheritance of the dilute factor is a simple recessive. So each F1, or first generation mixed offspring, would simply be carriers. Only when a dilute carrier would be bred to another dilute carrier would there be any chance at all for the production of a dilute affected offspring. It is the same mode of inheritance for any other simple recessive condition such as PRA or EIC.

On a side note, the coincidental jump in the AKC heights for Labradors after the advent of the “pointing lab” being developed may be just that, but interesting that only Canada followed suit in the difference in heights from what was previously the standard followed in the country of origin, Great Britain, and in every other country across the globe.

Consider this timeline:

1916 – Great Britain – original standard for Labrador Retrievers written – in correlated writings, heights were suggested to be 21 1/2″  – 22″ for bitches, 22″ – 22 1/2″ for dogs

1917 – USA – AKC standard for Labrador Retrievers virtually identical to GB standard

1928 –  23 Labradors registered with AKC

1929 – 1st pair of Weimeraners imported to USA

1931 – 40 Labradors registered with the AKC

1933 – 1st AKC Champion Labrador Retriever

1943 – AKC recognizes Weimeraners

1946 – there were 1736 Labradors registered with the AKC (Prior to the WWII time period, when dogs were not being shipped in or out of Great Britain because of the advent of the war, there was a great deal of importation of British Labradors into the USA.  Most, if not all of the Labradors registered with the AKC were imported from, or bred from, recently imported British Labradors

1950s –  the first “pointing” Labradors were developed

1956 – AKC standard standard revised.

22.5 – 24.5 for dogs and 21.5 to 23.5 for bitches.

1985 – AKC registers first “Silver”, Spook Culo born 2/2/1985. However, there may have been “silvers” registered as chocolates for several generations before Spook Culo.

1987 – AKC limits Labrador registration to three recognized colors

2006 – 1st “silvers” born in the UK on June 8, 2006. Registered as “Non Recognized
Colour”

Margaret Wilson
ShadowGlen Labradors, reg.
www.shadowglenlabradors.com

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The CPLR Breeders of Improved Genetics 2015

cplr-genetics

The “Council of Purebred Labradors” (CPLR) (I have mentioned that shady bunch here and here) are proud of their dirty little scheme called “Improved Genetics”.
“Although improved dilutes can produce quality dogs when bred to other improved dilute, further improvement is not very likely. Genetic Improvement comes by breeding in new genes to the Silver Labrador gene pool. That improvement can only come from BYC and SF Labs.”

The CPLR know like no other that it’s difficult to acquire BYC breeding material from reputable breeders, but if you succeed, you will get the title of “Breeder of Improved Genetics 2015. Plus the badge to put on your website.

The CPLR has a lot of members. From June 2012 to July 2015 they gathered 903 signatures for their petition. So I was interested to find out how many members of the CPLR managed to earn the Improved Genetics 2015 badge.

This is the Impressive List of people who earned the CPLR Improved Genetics 2015 badge:

Kristi Jenkins (Present Chairman CPLR; Von Bussler Labrador Retrievers)
Odin Harvell (Former Chairman CPLR; Lavish Labs)
Carleton Pope and Valina Pope (Former Chairman CPLR and present Director of Genetics; Starstruck Labradors)
Seth Ohms (Former CPLR Director of Research and Genetics; Phantom Labs)

Stacey Butters McKaa and Landon McKaa from Honey Hole Kennels also had a badge on their website, but since they didn’t – to my knowledge – have any position in the CPLR, and they weren’t mentioned as winners on the CPLR website, I recon that their publishing of the badge was illegal.

So, officially we have four people who were awarded the prestigious title of Breeder of Improved Genetics 2015. Almost the entire BOD of the CPLR.

What is an ethical breeder? 

If you care about genetics in general, and especially in Improved Genetics, you will make sure that your (potential) clients are able to find the pedigrees of your dogs, either on your website or with a link to a reliable pedigree database. Most dilute breeders, however, are extremely secretive when it comes to the pedigrees of their dogs. But what is it worth if you have a badge of Improved Genetics on your website, while the public can’t check how improved your breeding stock is?

CPLR Chairman Kristi Jenkins is a perfect example of how it shouldn’t be done. Look at her website, Von Bussler Labrador Retrievers, and try to find the pedigrees of her six dogs. If you can’t find any, try to Google them. I wish you luck.

Valina Pope and her husband Carleton Pope, Director of Genetics and former Chairman of the CPLR, also are extremely secretive when it comes to the pedigrees of their dogs. In fact they have always told the members of the CPLR not to publish any pedigrees of their dogs on the internet.

Odin Harvell, one of many former Chairmen of the CPLR, is equally secretive. The only exception is Seth Ohms, former Director of Research and Genetics of the CPLR, who has some pedigrees of his dogs on his Phantom Labs website. And, if you may assume that they’re not cheating, the McKaas.

silverped5

No, you won’t find pedigrees like this on the websites of most dilute breeders. Dilute breeders aren’t proud of the ancestors of their dilute dogs anymore. They try to hide it as much as possible, encouraged to do so by the CPLR. Instead, they publish long lists of purebred champions on their websites, with impressive texts like “Storm is EIC, CNM, and DM clear so her puppies can never be affected by these diseases. Her sire was an excellent hunter and OFA’d Excellent. Her extended pedigree includes: FC AFC Esprit Playin’ For Keeps, FC AFC Trumarc’s Hot Pursuit, NFC FC AFC San Joaquin Honcho, NFC AFC Storm’s Riptide Star, FC AFC Rippin’ Blue Thunder, FC AFC Belle’s Star Emmy Lou, FC AFC Meadow Woods Dusty Roads, CH Rocheby Joseph’s Coat CD TD JH, CH Cedarwood Gunner O’Fawnhaven CD SH, Kelleygreens Chocolate Cherry CD, Bay Creek’s McDonald MH, FC AFC Esprit Playin’ For Keeps, and Bay Creek’s Ash Macann MH. Storm is charcoal that also carries for chocolate/silver and yellow/champagne. She also passed her CERF (eyes) exam!” 
This Storm is a perfect example of the dilute breeders’ modus operandus. Not a single dilute ancestor is mentioned. Storm’s pedigree name is DN Silver Storm of TNT, she was born 11-12-2010, her AKC registration number is SR65290604, yet OFA doesn’t know her. No records matched your request.

Conclusion: the practices of the dilute breeders in general and the people in charge of the CPLR particularly are anything but ethical.

Jack Vanderwyk,
July 2015

P.S.: I will not rule out the possibility that some people will haste themselves to put some real or fake pedigrees on their website, just to prove me “wrong” and write an article about it.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Kellogg’s Weimaraners and other “coincidences”

kelloggweimaraners2

For many years now the people of the CPLR have been denying that the Kellogg family ever had Weimaraners. In fact they only needed one Weimaraner to breed their “pointing Labs”, but I managed to find two of them: Kellogg CD, AKC S571232, born 2 NOV 1952, and Blue Boy Kellogg, AKC SA050287, born 26 FEB 1954.

stillwaterweimaraners2

In the same Weimaraner database I found the name of another notorious breeder of dilute “Labradors”, Stillwater. I couldn’t get all of them in a screen shot.

beavercreekweimaraners2

Finally, for now, I found Dean Crist’s (Culo) business-partner Beavercreek, who were active in the Weimaraner world between 1962 and 1976.

Of course, the CPLR will try to argue that this isn’t “scientific evidence”, and even “prove” that one of the many dogs in the photos was bred for a food company, and in their defense the CPLR will keep arguing that there is no absolute proof that the breeders mentioned in this article were the same people as the dilute breeders I mentioned.
So let’s turn it around. If the Kelloggs were the “reputable” Labrador breeders the CPLR claims they are — why would they acquire dilute dogs from their own old dilute stock, and breed these dilute dogs, for the world to know?

Click here to read the article ‘Silver’ Labrador Secrets Revealed. 

Click here to view the pedigree of the dilute dog  Kellogg’s Vanadium Chip McCoy

These are only my first results. I will keep you informed.

Jack Vanderwyk,
July, 2015

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment