last week I spoke with a poodle breeder who has been breeding parti colored poodles for over thirty years. She brought me out a chocolate parti mama dog and said, "Take her for example. I bred her to a chocolate and I got all chocolate babies. I bred her to a black, and every single puppy was black! She is not a strong chocolate producer. She throws whatever she is crossed with."
It just floored me that after thirty years, she did not understand that chocolate is simple recessive to black. If the black dog does not carry a hidden chocolate gene, he cannot possibly produce chocolate, ever. The mama dog was not a 'weak chocolate producer. The father dog was simply homozygous for black.
My point is, just because someone has been breeding for three, thirty, fifty, eighty years, doesn't mean they understand the genetic ground rules for the variety/breed they are working on.
My I re-emphasize, I am NOT bashing anyone, or insulting them. I'm just saying, years spent doing the same thing, does not always mean years spent improving your understanding of all the genetics that affect the breed you are working on. Most breed by look-see method. They pick the most phenotypically pleasing thing in front of them that season. That's how I breed, to be honest, unless I know some genetic hidden trait I'm working on. If genetic info comes to light that bears HEAVILY on the breeding choices and outcomes of hundreds of people you are imploring to support the breed by showing, it would behoove the people in power to write a standard that reflects genetic realities is all I'm saying. Not knowing is nto a crime. Hearing important info laid out for you, and then ignoring it is just Emperor's New Clothes in my opinion.
