Revision of the Dachshund Standard.....Any Comments??

[Dachshundrsq]

Evidently AKC has told the parent club (DCA) that our Dachshund Standard needs addressing in regards to "color" issues. DCA is allowed to make changes to the dachshund standard every 5 years, though it often goes several years without any alterations. It is my understanding that AKC has asked DCA to address the Piebald issue in particular. Members within DCA have brought up other issues as well. Like adding an "Intermediate" class to the standard to include dachshunds in the 11-16 lb range and making decisions regarding the Double Dapples.
Here is what is basically on the table:
Piebald:
Add Piebald as a acceptable pattern
Add Piebald as an acceptable pattern but make the pattern a minor fault.
Add Piebald and make it a serious fault (what is the point??)
Specifically state that Piebald is not an acceptable pattern.
Double Dapple:
State that Double Dapples are a minor fault.
State that Double Dapples are a Serious Fault.
State that Double Dapples are not acceptable due to potential health issues known to occur with the breeding of the pattern.
New "Intermediate" size added to the Classes available for dachshunds in the show ring.
The class would consist of the 11-16 lb dachshunds who currently either have to be shown in Bred-By, American Bred, Open Standard or not shown at all.
I was looking for input. Recently, there has been talk due to identifying characterisitcs and confusion with judges on identifying the double dapple and piebald and the judges ability to distinguish between them, that perhaps the Standard should state that no amount of white is acceptable.
Obviously, this idea is quite upsetting to me and several other people I know who have a direct interest in the Piebald Pattern being included in the Official Standard.
Any ideas or input??
I am not a member of DCA, only members get to vote for anything pertaining to the parent club, changes to the standard etc. It will take a 2/3 vote yeah or neah as to what will pass and be presented to AKC, mostlikely after the next Annual DCA meeting.
Anyway, I was just looking for some input!

[blazeman]

I have only seena few double dapples... and haven't had a chance to really study them. Other than the eyes... how can you tell a DD from a piebald?

[Dachshundrsq]

A Double Dapple WILL have spots on whatever solid color they happen to be. (not the white areas) The red dapples would be the hardest to tell because sometimes their dapple spots disappear as they get older. I guess in this a case few double dapples could pass through as piebalds if they didn't have blue eyes and if the White was plentiful enough to cause them to look more like piebalds. Often times, and I would say this is probably the norm IF the dapple gene was not mixed with the piebald gene (a definate NO NO) the double dapple does not have the uniform white that a piebald has. A piebald usually looks close to identical on both sides of it's body, a double dapple will usually have more white on one side or the other and often has a white divided face. When I got Shay she was pregnant with a litter of pups. I inquired about the sire of the litter from the lady who supposedly accidently bred her (she didn't own the sire, he was brought in) Anyway, she said he had wonderful mottled ears. I said he sounds like a double dapple or at least a dapple piebald, she said he isn't dapple. Well the puppies arrived, and there was 2 dapples. One dapple irish spotted and 1 dapple piebald. Even with the very limited colored spots on the dapple pie, I could tell he was a dapple.

[TessieMom]

Wish I could vote! I would say yes to the pie balds and absolutely NO to the double dapple because of the health issues. I would also like to see the intermediate class here as it is in other countries.

Good Luck! I did see the proposed changes on the AKC web page the last time I was looking around.

Rena and the Waco crew

[Heidismom]

I would say yes to piebald, yes to intermediate, and No to the double dapple here. (Although from the link to an article Mack posted, it sounds like the Germans know what they are doing!) Julia B.

[Dachshundrsq]

The article. I happened to see that post and also went to read the article. I found it extremely interesting a noticed 2 things, which we KNOW now, and what they thought they knew then (and actually did know regarding dapples) that this person did not realize.
#1 A Dapple and White referenced to in this article is a double dapple, and WE know double dapples WILL produce 100% dapple in their offspring, this means when you breed a double dapple to a solid dog, 100% of the offspring will be dapples (this is why double dapples are so important to puppy mills, they produce ALL dapples and the puppy mills get more money for this pattern) Now, they mention that their Blk/Tan bitch produced dapple and whites. This is impossible, because we now know that only dapple to dapple or double dapple to dapple produces dapple and whites (ie: Double Dapples)It takes 2 dapples to produce a double dapple, however, if their Blk/Tan bitch carried a spotting gene, and the dapple carried a spotting gene (not so unlikely since they did a lot of line-breeding and in-breeding, wanting to keep their dapple lines "pure") then what happened was, they got a dapple piebald and assumed it was a double dapple.
#2 The article mentions that that not all double dapples produce 100% dapple offspring, not true again. They mention that their dapple and white bitch produced a solid red puppy. Hmmm is this the spotting gene once again showing up, making a dapple piebald look like a double dapple.We KNOW that a double dapple produces 100% dapples in their offspring.
I actually forwarded this article on because the whereabouts of the Piebald gene is in question, since there is no real documentation on them and though very OLD pictures exist with Piebald appearing dogs in them, they are often discribed as Dapple and whites, red and whites, or black and whites. All of the old books on the dachshund history discribes white dachshunds, or discriptions of the ones I listed above. I suspect "Piebald" is a fairly new term in dachshunds (30 years or so) and before this they were discribed as Whites, or red and White, and Black and Whites.
All of this is in Theory and sadly we cannot go back in history and pick the brains of those who used this terminology.

[Mack]

I'd like to make a couple of points. Concerning the post below which references the article on dapples: I have since been told by Carol Smith, a sometimes poster here, that that article was written about 1988. So it's possible, if not likely, that the science has caught up somewhat.

Also, the a point was made about judges not being able to tell a double dapple from a piebald and thus throwing out all dogs from the ring who have white. I've read this before and have to say: For Pete's sake, what is so hard about telling the two apart, especially for a supposedly learned judge? I do recognize the difficulty of spotting a red dapple, but I would wager if you put 10 double dapples and piebalds in front of me, I could correctly identify nine of them. And I'm just a layman with an interest in the topic. Somewhere on a double dapple dog, there's almost assuredly going to be an identifiable dapple mark that is the tell-tale sign.

[Dapple Dandy]

I'd like to see the intermediate size added or better yet the gap in weight removed all together. Split the difference, raise the weight limit for minis, lower it for standards. Give judges the flexibility of not having to consider weight along with all the objectives contained in the standard.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about minis that are fat or standards that have been breed down to look puppyish, I'm refering to dachshunds that fit the standard to a T, when weight is taken out of the mix. Judges know what they like and aren't going to deviate from it just because AKC revises the weight limit. I just think it would make life much easier for all those involved, if weight gap was taken out of the breed standard.

I'm not going to get into the color issue, except to say that the people who should be controled, the puppy millers, won't be effected by any changes that DCA or AKC make to the standard. They'll simply register their puppies incorrectly and continue to charge ungoddly prices for "rare" colors.

I'm not sure of the origin of the term Piebald, but it's been used to identify bi-colored Pinto (Paint) Horses for a really long time. In fact the dictionary still references horses in it's text for the word.

[Mack]

So far as the piebald question is concerned, one could argue that the breed standard doesn't specifically EXCLUDE them.

The standards reads: "Color of Hair: Although base color is immaterial, certain patterns and basic colors predominate.'' Then it goes on to describe one-color, two-color and dapple dachshunds.

To me, "base color is immaterial'' means the base color could be white or whatever.

And, "certain patterns and basic colors predominate" is merely a statement that colors such as red and black and tan are in larger numbers than others, such as piebald -- which is certainly true.

[Dapple Dandy]

That's why the clarifications are necessary. At this point the standard leaves too much to the interpretation of the individual.

I still maintain there are judges who do not believe that "dachshunds of color" belong in the conformation ring. There are others that are open to all colors as long as the body structure, size and coat fit the standard. Changing the breed standard will not change their minds.

It is my understanding that the proposed changes are being considered not with the intention to harm or exclude anyone, but to address health issues faced by breeding for color. I think DCA & AKC have tried to let the breeders police themselves on this issue but it hasn't worked, so now they feel like they have to step in.

The merle issue is not a new one, Sheltie breeders have dealt with it forever. Breeders avoided deaf/blind litters by using their heads, breeding for conformation and intelligence, not color. You won't see the term "rare color" used in Sheltie litter announcements like you do Dachshunds to generate higher puppy prices.

[Timber]

I have a question...
It seems like everyone here is against the qualification of double dapples because of the heath risks. Now, I don't really know much about Double Dapples, so excuse me if this is obvious. Is there such a thing as a well-bred DD? Or is it always a risk when breeding them?

[doxunzX3]

Sorry Tiffany I don't have an answere for your question on the DD's. But from what I have read and heard is that the blindness is a diffinet chance that you take when breeding them. Again, I am just repeating what I have heard. Not to long ago they had the pair of doxies for adoption that were both almost blind or close anyway.
For that reason I think it alone it is scarey if there isn't some kind of regualtion but the puppy mills aren't going to care either way.
The size I think should also be simaler to the German standards. I like the idea of having the tweenys allowed in the show ring. Some of them are being passed up and they are excellent breed representatives. It is a shame if they don't get there chance to prove themselfs.
IMO :flower:

[TessieMom]

Most, but not all of the double dapples I have seen, have had eye or ear problems. I do remember one that did not. He was not a particularly well configured dog. Head was large for the rest of the body, but he could see and hear. The best article that I have seen on this subject is:

double dapples (http://www.dachshund.org/article_double_dapple.html#who)

You can scroll up or down to see more information. There are at least 3 major breeders in Texas that specialize in double dapples and several backyard breeders.

Rena and the Waco Crew

[Cindi]

It was stated by Dr Nixon and those who did color breedings at a seminar at DCA in Kentucky quite a few years ago that ALL DD's have an eye anomaly of some sort of some varying degree. Every DD that I have seen have had smaller eyes than normal but a JUDGE (remember they are ALL of varying qualifications) may not be able to sort out what IS smaller-compared to what?-as those of us that ONLY look at dachshunds all the time and can readily tell 'oh those are smaller than the normal eye or than what we would ever want'. There were also two red and white dachshunds there, one DD and one piebald that although several of us could readily tell which was which it might have been difficult for a judge to quickly pick out the difference.
It has been said that a DD's spot edges are not distinct as a piebald's edges. But can we put that in words as definite? Don't know. There are judges that absolutely positively HATE white backgrounds in dachshunds, use the wording in the standard as it is now which states - only a small white on the chest EXCEPT IN DD'S (I believe) and that is how they are getting around allowing the piebalds. That is why AKC is asking for the clarification of the standard.
Having been involved in rescue and seeing nearly every DD come in needing eye *tissue* removal (not an actual eye involved because there was never one there) and limited vision in the eye that IS there, I'm sorry but I can't see why anyone would chance a breeding with this possibility. There is no way to convince me you can have *good* merle genes and *bad* merle genes and saying some will never produce those problems. If there is a chance you could produce a puppy just by that combination of color genetics, then pick another option. *We*, as reputable breeders, are supposed to be the good guys.

Cindi

[Timber]

thanks for all the info. :)

[crock]

I have a DD that has normal size eyes. Perfect sight and hearing. He is well proportioned and extremely healthy. That's doesn't say right or wrong. But healthy, sighted and hearing is possible.
Char

[Cindi]

It is possible to have a normal sighted and hearing dog. That is not what I am saying that it is not possible. What I am saying is that there is a risk, a chance, that with every breeding some puppy may be born with the possibility of the other possibility. A known chance. Unlike in breeding a solid to a dapple where it would be a fluke of genetics if something disastrous happened and not a known possibility that it could happen.

What we were told by the professionals at the time is that somewhere in the DD's eyes there would be an anomaly of some kind either in the retina, in the physical shape, something. That is just what we were told. So far in rescue, that is what we have found. Usually to the extreme of course.

Cindi

[TessieMom]

I just picked up a long haired double dapple red boy. He is 8 months old and spins in circles all the time. Has very little sight and limited hearing. He is staying overnight and then going to Midland tomorrow. Sweet boy, just really sad that he has so many problems. My foster boys were not very understanding, so he has to stay in a crate tonight.

Rena and the Waco crew