Question for the Lab breeders.

[Crafty]

Now I've already taken a beating over this on another site. I'm not trying to start an arguement or "trolling". I just want to know what the big deal is over "silver" labs. Now I understand that its not a standard color. But that could be said for yellow and chocolate way back when. I also value the opinion of breeders who still breed for ability as opposed to "looks". Personally I think the show dogs are wandering off the tradition style of the breed as it is so I don't put a lot of stock in what they say. My dogs were all selected for hunting ability period. Looks were secondary. I wanted dogs that were built for the job and 100% healthy. Now I've happened across a charcol colored pup and took her for my kennel. She keeps impressing me with her natural ability. So other than the fact that she has one of the most beautiful coats I've seen, whats the big deal?

[orhunter]

The problem is, when a breeder selects a color over hunting ability, the breed does suffer. If a particular color comes out of "chance" nothing is lost. Every breeder has his/her own priority. If you're satisfied with the priority, chances are good you'll get the dog you want.

[Kiger]

Train the dog to run Field Trials and prove to folks what the dog is capable of. you might find you have a Gold mine if you have a "different " color and it can be proven to perform.

If you go around bragging how great she is and try to capitize on that, then you should be beat up. (figureatively speaking that is)

[Doc E]

As far as I know, "Silver" Labs have been bred for a number of years --- the only problem is that they have only been bred for color, and not for performance either in the field or on the "circuit".

If a person has a "Silver" Lab that gets some top notch titles and when bred to another "Silver", those pups are also capable of top notch performance, then ya might have something -- but for me, I wouldn't touch one with a 10' pole without top notch titles and pups (with repeat breedings) that are proven to be equally as good.


.

[Bruce Schwartz]

If a person has a "Silver" Lab that gets some top notch titles and when bred to another "Silver", those pups are also capable of top notch performance, then ya might have something -- but for me, I wouldn't touch one with a 10' pole without top notch titles and pups (with repeat breedings) that are proven to be equally as good.

Good point Doc. Back in the 70's when I was a wantabe field trialer the talk was that yellows were awful ... but not quite as awful as chocolates. I think that's all been disproved by good breeding and really good training ... ask Mike Lardy who I think won the Nationals with a chocolate.

Even though the talk on this forum is "does it hunt", I see a ton of compliments bestowed on how good a person's dog looks, etc. The show people say form follows function (or something like that), the argument being that if they don't have the right conformation they can't run right, etc.

I'm thinking we really want it all.

Crafty, you got a picture of a "silver" lab?

[yawallac]

I used to cringe back in the 80's when my NAVHDA buddies would cull 7 or 8 GWP pups out of 10 because the coats were not "perfect". While I certainly understood the importance of coat, I still couldn't help to wonder how many fine hunting dogs were put to death because of a single trait. I believe that a breeder of hunting dogs should breed for traits like nose, desire, water love, point, etc. before cosmetic traits such as color or coat. Certainly coat is more important than color but it is still less important in my mind than the hunting traits.

[birddogmjd]

I have a Pudelpointer and thank God the Breeders of this breed do not cull for coat. This dog is a Smoothy with no furnishings. He is the best dog I have ever had. He will do anything to get the bird. He loves the water. and excells finding shot birds in the marsh. He does not mark birds as well as Lab, but makes up for it in drive. Upland bird are pointed and retrieved very well. I do not think coat matters as long as they have a good prey drive. I hunt 70% waterfoul ducks and geese and 30% upland.

[Crafty]

The first is the pup I picked up. Which is actually considered a charcol color. The second is a silver male local to the area. Its tough to see the difference in the photos.

[Bruce Schwartz]

Thanks, Crafty. I'd never seen a charcol or silver - or maybe have and didn't know what I was looking at. I agree, it's a beautiful color.

[yawallac]

How was that color developed? Was weim introduced at some point?

[terryg]

no expert here on lab colors but the blue doberman(same color) was a recessive throw back from continuous breeding of red dogs(rare???? :roll: ) diluting the black. then breeding of blues(rarer????? :roll:) to create fawn and before i got out of dobes there was some white( :roll: :roll: :roll: ) floating around.

IMO, the "color thing" is too strong in ALL BREEDS AND BREEDING(even horses)and the results speak for themselves.

I was riding with some folks once and saw a horse i was trying to figure out the breed on. i asked his owner what kind of horse it was and he proudly and loudly proclaimed "he's a buckskin" . i said i know what color he is. what "breed" is he? the man then sheepisly said he was part qh, part tb, and part mustang :roll:

i have no problem with any dog or horse, but as with people, i judge them on what they are as opposed to what color they are!

[yawallac]

"he's a buckskin"

[Cora's Shadow]

Silver labs pop up in our papers all the time for $700-$1200. I'm just glad that your silver lab looks normal. I have seen 3 silver labs (not a large sample size I know) in three different towns (thus, probably not related). All three of them had curly tails. The one was so bad that it looked more like a Shar-Pei tail. Also, the shar-pei tailed dog had droopy eyes that looked they needed surgical correction. They were always watering (this dog was in a puppy class with me). It was the calmest puppy I had ever seen. I don't think it ever moved except when commanded to do so. But with that shar-pei tail and those St. Bernard eyes, I couldn't help but wonder if it was really worth it to pay $800 for a curly, silver, bump on a log. I hope you do earn some titles for your silver lab...but until you do, I will probably have this stereotypical belief that silver labs are genetically inferior specimens. Maybe if someone bred silver labs for anything besides color, they could become a respectable dog. But until that day arrives, I will see them as another labradoodle (i.e. exhorbent price for a different-looking dog).

[CherrystoneWeims]

Take a close look at the pedigrees on those dogs. I bet there are some gaps in them. Those pups look like they have lots of Weim not too far back. I'll also bet that the kennel that you purchased them from breeds Weims as a second breed?

I'm a Weim breeder and also do Weim rescue. Many times we have to identify breeds at the shelters.

[KY Duck Hunter]

I'm by no means an expert on this topic, but I have done a fair amount of reading on the silver labs because I was intrigued when I first heard of them.

From what I have read, I definitely agree with the other posters that the biggest problem with the silver labs, from a hunter's perspective, is that they are bred for color, not for ability. With that said, there could be a whole other debate regarding whether or not that matters when we're talking about the #1 breed in America and a LOT of people buying labs they never plan to hunt with. A lot of them might say they don't care about skills because they don't plan to hunt. But that is a HUGE mistake in my opinion because you are ruining the breed from a perspective of removing its natural ability to do what it was meant to do. What I'm trying to say is that if you get a lab, whether you are a hunter or not, you should respect the dog's history or don't get one. Even if you have no plans to breed the dog and you get it neutered, you're still encouraging these breeders to keep doing what they are doing.

I think what a lot of us are assuming is that there are a lot of shady breeders out there who are using Weims to get the results they want. From what I have read one of the best ways to spot the suspicious ones are the sheen of their coats. Lab coats usually are somewhat 'flat' in color, even if it's a healthy coat. The 'silver labs' that have those super-shiny coats are often Weim mixes. The other thing to notice is the eyes. That's just a couple of things I have noticed with them.

If you had a few naturally occuring 'silver labs' (they are really considered charcoal or smokey black), both proven hunters, you could possibly start to produce some decent lines I guess. But it's so hard to make that happen because true charcoal labs are few and far between. What often happens is that the lines are bred back onto themselves (fathers with daughters, mothers with sons, siblings with one another) and you have high potential for genetic problems. But the lure of high dollars for them is a big temptation for unethical breeders.

Our yellow lab came from a litter of 10 pups. 4 chocolate, 4 yellow and 2 black. We had no pre-determined choices on color or gender. We did our puppy tests and just lucked out with a yellow male, which is what I had my fingers crossed for. That has to be the attitude when selecting puppies from breeds of varying color. Our dog has a very light, almost white coat with some almost red shading in certain areas. But it's a true yellow. I also saw a few breeders trying to pass off 'red' labs in the paper as well. I would never have given them a minute of my time.

There is a lot of speculation that silver labs will one day get AKC approval. Not likely. We may someday see charcoal as a breed standard but it would require a huge national effort among breeders with true charcoal labs. I think it is a LONG way off.

p.s. Another thing I forgot to mention is that silver labs are just plain creepy looking. Even if they were a true breed I would never want one. They give me the willies.