Catdaddy89 wrote:Well then why is a "red" which is only bred for color still a good dog but a charcoal a piece is chit? I'm not following y'all. You keep saying that they are junk and not labs but no one has told me a background or a breed cross. Why is there such a devout hate for the charcoal? I would also like to re-iterate I do not want a silver I want a charcoal. Is there a difference in the two? I hate to seem ungrateful forthe info you have given me but no one has really hit my question.
Obtaining the darkest of the yellow color range has been somewhat bred for but there are some black parents that carry the yellow gene that will tend to produce darker yellow offspring. I know of a couple FC dogs for example that tend to deliver offspring of the darker yellow and sometimes referred to as "Red" by breeders looking to market them to uninformed buyers.
Charcoal or Silver, both are born from parents carrying the extremely recessive dilute color gene. There isn't definite proof of their lineage containing a different breed though, however there is a tendency where people believe there's a weim in the mx a ways back due to eye color, common ear size, and just the nature of their build being shorter hair and longer legs than the AKC standard of a labrador.
The reason for the backlash of users here to the designer colors is because of many that have already been named, you have failed to read them. I posted numerous reasons why they're typically not desirable or encouraged to be purchased if you're looking for a working dog or even for anyone for that matter. Due to the extreme low probability of a dog to carry these very very recessive dilute color genetics, an exceptional amount of inbreeding and selective breeding only for that color takes place. When a gene pool is so small, often times breeders overlook the primary reasons for selective breeding practices. Those practices should include health of eyes, hips, elbows, EIC, CNM and PRA. Those practices should also include pairing dogs with the most desirable traits of marking, confirmation to the breed standard (size, build, coat, tail), mouth, biddability (training capability to learn quickly without excessive pressure or time), water attitude and temperament.
In order to provide a complete litter of all offspring displaying the dilute color genes visually and with these dilute dogs being of such a small small gene pool, the breeders aren't able to be selective enough when pairing sire and dam for a breeding. It's nearly impossible for them to cover their bases on everything I mentioned in the last paragraph all while still being able to produce multiple litters of these designer colors.
There's a direct correlation to why you see so many more extremely good black labs than other colors. Their gene pool is massive due to its dominant color genetics so there are very large lists of some of the best dogs to breed to. It's getting substantially better, however offspring of the chocolate color were originally culled from original breeding lines hundreds of years ago because of its very recessive nature. Views changed and more chocolates were available and then people started breeding just for the chocolate color in the same way these current dilute color labs are being bred. Many years later, you might see a couple chocolates capable of competing with the best dogs in the country each year at the National Field Trial. They're starting to be bred better but there are still a lot of breeders just going for the color today.