I'm not going to give a link, but apparently the world's first chocolate and tan PUG is for sale on a free ads site. 8K, black and tan 10K.

They look like chihuahua cross pugs to me, fools and their money :-D

Chi or maybe Griffon or peke.
It's not easy to decide where they picked up the tan pattern gene, or the liver!  I am so tempted to enquire and ask about pedigree, registration etc. If the latter is non existent then surely trading standards might be interested?

My bet is Pug x Griffon x Chihuahua -the faces looks Griffon to me, but the colour must have come from something else. I would love to know if somebody will buy them at that price.....

I wish we had the Canadian law where a dog can only be described as purebred if it is registered with a national Kennel club.

I'm glad I've got a thinking cap...lol.
I've just put it on, and realised that if someone buys these dogs for breeding *more* rare expensive pugs, they are going to be VERY disappointed indeed....

Liver/choc needs both parents to carry it to make more, so where are they going to find another liver-carrier Pug, without close inbreeding or cross breeding?

Further to that, all pure-bred pugs are either a(y) fawn or K(b) black, and both of those will completely mask a black-and-tan pattern. Again, close inbreeding or cross breeding will be needed to make more.

Now I am even MORE tempted to make some enquiries, just to see what claims might be made to anyone buying them who wants to breed more of the same.

Go on Sue, you know you want to :-)

> Go on Sue, you know you want to

How dare you Jane! The very thought!
That was going to be my pension fund lolol

Lol

> Now I am even MORE tempted to make some enquiries, just to see what claims might be made to anyone buying them who wants to breed more of the same.

I think you should too.

>Further to that, all pure-bred pugs are either a(y) fawn or K(b) black, and both of those will completely mask a black-and-tan pattern.

It would be interesting to find out how these pups were produced given that it should be genetically impossible. Please report back if you do investigate. :)

I do believe its the woman who also breeds blue, platinum, white, brindle and whatever else she can dream up. And as for registration, the KC are allowing 'Colour not recognised' registrations in. So no doubt she'll wrangle a registration up for them!
Makes me sick :(

> the faces looks Griffon to me, but the colour must have come from something else

Griffons can come up chocolate & tan. It only expresses itself when both parents carry the gene for it. It will be overidden by red, so can be carried for many generations.

It crops up now & then in a mating of a black & tan with a red. It's not an allowable colour in Griffons either. Don't see why as it's got no adverse effects healthwise. But probably best not to encourage the PFs & BYBs. Not at those prices anyway

I do believe its the woman who also breeds blue, platinum, white, brindle and whatever else she can dream up. And as for registration, the KC are allowing 'Colour not recognised' registrations in. So no doubt she'll wrangle a registration up for them!
Makes me sick

£8,000 & £10,000 for a first bred colour, well that would need to have certified genetics on a sold gold certificate for me, propsterous!

Surely the KC would recognise a black and tan pug as not just being unrecognised but quite possibly 'very' iffy. If I knew who this person was I would just have to send the advert to the KC asking them to look into any registration they can not turn their back on things like this going on..... what do the breed clubs say also? It needs to be sent to them too, people cannot just go on ignoring these things, maybe the breed clubs need to start instigating taking people to trading standards.

None of us can do anything about wild claims with unregistered dogs apart from trading standards but when it comes to KC reg dogs the KC and the breed clubs need to get involved and make sure everything is legit.

I do believe that the kennel club in the past have refused to register individual dogs with colours that are impossible with the genetics of the supposed parents, so I doubt these will be KC registered.

Hopefully, :-)

But it could be possible to slip through the net if not pointed out first, I can imagine with thousands of registrations a week it would be easy to not notice something like that, I don't know how carefully they look at things and if someone is not on the ball that day.........

Lets hope if these are to be KC reg that it is pointed out. :-) Either for legitimacy (you never know ;-) ) or for cross breeding and needing absolute refusal.

I wish we had the Canadian law where a dog can only be described as purebred if it is registered with a national Kennel club.

Brainless, I sooooooooo........ wish this would happen. :-) How did that come about, was it the KC over there? Or from a lobby of breeders, would be interested to know how it was secured. (If you know) as maybe we could try to push the same over here.

What about unrecognised breeds?

You have to ask why they are not recognised? I guess it would have to be the same they would still have to be referred to as their cross breeds until the KC gives them recognition. It cannot be one rule for one and another for others.

I wish we had the Canadian law where a dog can only be described as purebred if it is registered with a national Kennel club.

Yeah, but our law does not require any inspection of the dog, people lie about colour, thus we have silver Labs registered as chocolate for example.  Plus nobody inspects free ads.  It's a pretty toothless law.

>You have to ask why they are not recognised?

There are plenty of FCI-recognised breeds that national KCs don't recognise. It doesn't mean they're not purebred.

> I do believe that the kennel club in the past have refused to register individual dogs with colours that are impossible with the genetics of the supposed parents, so I doubt these will be KC registered.

Certain breeders have been put on a regime of having to have all their puppies DNA tested before they're allowed to be registered. TBH I think this has been more because of irregularities of supposed parentage within their breed, rather than any cross-breeding. But it does require many complaints before the KC will do antyhing.

> There are plenty of FCI-recognised breeds that national KCs don't recognise. It doesn't mean they're not purebred.

Sorry but to be recognised by teh FCI they have to be recognised by a National Kennel club, as the FCI is an umbrealla organisation for these.

teh Canadian law is quote on teh No puppy mills canada site.

>Sorry but to be recognised by teh FCI they have to be recognised by a National Kennel club

Yes, I appreciate that, but if the dogs are exported (say to this country) and bred here they can't be registered at all (not recognised here, not born in a country where they are recognised), but they're still pure bred.

But if they are not recognised by the KC you would not be trying to register them, would you! And they could not be registered because they were not recognised not because the were cross bred.

Pugs are recognised so they could try to register.

>But if they are not recognised by the KC you would not be trying to register them, would you!

No, but you would want to be able to advertise them as pure bred when you sold them, wouldn't you? They wouldn't be crossbreeds or mongrels.

The Canadian regulation would mean that the Barbet could not be advertised as a pedigree dog when it clearly is.

we have colours in my breed that are not accepted. No crossings, no health problems just thst someone decided many years ago that they didn't like the colours.

AAWW give the link and I will phone. ......

>we have colours in my breed that are not accepted. No crossings, no health problems just thst someone decided many years ago that they didn't like the colours

Likewise in mine.

> It's a pretty toothless law.

but a buyer so inclined could sue for misrepresnetation.

You would advertise them as a Barbet but they would not be registered.

If the law was that you could not register anything by a pure breed no problem but if it said you could not advertise it then no problem either it is a Barbet. What you should not be able to do is sell a dog you are calling by a name that suggest it is a pure breed when it is not.

We must not forget there is a difference between what the KC recognises as a breed and those that they are prepared to register. It is a case really if the breed is registered by its own national KC.

>You would advertise them as a Barbet but they would not be registered.

You're missing the point. :-) Barbara said "I wish we had the Canadian law where a dog can only be described as purebred if it is registered with a national Kennel club." A dog, not a breed. Under that system, Barbet pups born in this country could not be advertised as purebred, even if both their parents were overseas champions. Despite not being registered in this country (because the breed isnt recognised) they would still be purebred, which it seems the Canadian system would forbid.

What I meant was you don't need to adverts something like a Barbe as a pure breed anyone wanting one would ask for its pedigree.

I don't know how the system works with imported dogs of foreign breeds that are no yet accepted on the KC register, as far as I can work out they can still be registered with their home country or FCI???

Otherwise how would their offspring eventually go on the KC register once recognition and acceptance onto the import register.

So the law would still apply.

Our members with new breeds may be able to cast light on that one.

>Otherwise how would their offspring eventually go on the KC register once recognition and acceptance onto the import register.

This explains how it's done. You need to be able to provide pedigrees to show that the dogs are purebred despite not being registered anywhere.

Hi Carrington,

Our breed clubs have been on to the KC about the colour issue. Needless to say the KC dont give a hoot! Its all about money, as per usual!
Here is the clubs letter and the KC reply as published in the clubs quarterly bulletine (the breeders name and dogs names have been obscured for online privacy)
http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m71/tussilago-pugs/pugcolourletteredited.jpg
As you can see the KC do not care, so sad and incredibly frustrating!!

By PDAE  Date 24.03.13 16:21 GMT
we have colours in my breed that are not accepted. No crossings, no health problems just thst someone decided many years ago that they didn't like the colours.

The pug genetically has a mask, these novelty colours do not have a mask. So the novelties are not some long lost recessive colour, just a crossbred dog that's been bred back to a pug enough times to keep the colour and give them a pug shape. Sometimes the brindle's have a darker face but then again many brindle dogs do.

Pug colours are black or fawn (with a black mask). Full stop!

but a buyer so inclined could sue for misrepresnetation. True, but I wonder if a buyer so inclined might have had the forethought to look for a reputable breeder in the first place.

No I know that these are crossbreeds and also dislike the advertising of such "rare" cases...... 

So why are the KC so determined  carry on registering mis-coloured dogs if the breed clubs ask them not to? I thought it was supposed to be the clubs who set the breed standard not the KC. they were quick to point that out when the standards were being criticised after PDE.

And if they are saying in that letter they would only refuse to register a dog if there were health issues associated with the colour why are they still registering merle beardies when that breed club did  not want them registered.

Thank you pugnut for the link to that letter. :-)

Seems to be a bog standard reply to the breed colour standards set out years ago. No common sense applied! Ridiculous.

Maybe this needs to be sent direct to the KC's genetics dept to start a proper enquiry as it really is not just about a non-recognised colour but a possible cross in the lines.

Just to cover all sides here, nothing has gone through the breed clubs & the KC giving permission for this breeder to cross breed as was done with the Dalmatian to help with genetic health issues has it? (I'm pretty sure it would have been news if so.... but?) As it is the only reason I can think that the breeder so blatantly can advertise what has been bred here.

Also (found it yesterday) the advert has now been closed but there was no information on that advert stating the pups were or were 'to be' KC registered,  in fact it gave very little information at all?

Let's hope anyone wishing to part with that amount of money would wish to check out the pedigree, but fools and their money...... :-(

> xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">But it could be possible to slip through the net if not pointed out first, I can imagine with thousands of registrations a week it would be easy to not notice something like that, I don't know how carefully they look at things and if someone is not on the ball that day.........

also assuming the person lists the colour as black and tan on the registration papers. if they just put black the kc won't notice anything wrong and someone gullible enough to fall for this would probably also be easily convinced that you just need to write black for a black and tan registration :S

Advert gone now - sold, or taken down (we can hope).

This advertiser is actually in Lithuania, as apparently are the pups.  They are not linked to the breeder with the "rare" whites, blues etc,  in fact she has been extremely annoyed at this ad!  I think because they appear more "rare" and are more expensive than hers!  She has posted on FB that these pups do not actually exist and that it is a straight forward scam - buyer sends the cash and no pups arrive.  Interesting how the in fighting has already started in the rare colour ranks :)

Anyone else seen that there is going to be a "RARE COLOUR" breeds show at Bakewell Showground in the summer?  Aimed at Frenchis and Bulldogs, but other rare colour dogs welcome.  So far, no definition of what is considered rare ;)

Anyone else seen that there is going to be a "RARE COLOUR" breeds show at Bakewell Showground in the summer?  Aimed at Frenchis and Bulldogs, but other rare colour dogs welcome.  So far, no definition of what is considered rare

if the trend carries on it will end up being the acepted colours that are the rare one.

Look at how blue staffs were touted are rare a few years ago now most of the adds online are for blues.

> Look at how blue staffs were touted are rare a few years ago now most of the adds online are for blues.

And you can't give 'em away now - FB selling page has a 17 month Blue staff bitch £100, still not sold.

Just found a new one!  Dont miss the bit about how 5 generations will make it a pedigree! 

"Bichon Noir for STUD. Needs 5 generations for the Noir too become pedigree and Alfie is third. Cross between Bichon Frise and Toy Poodle too create the perfect dog the Noir. Loveable dog.. great health.. good with kids and friendly."

Wonder how they work out he is 3 generations?  3rd gen cross to cross would be the usual meaning but seems unlikely.

Wonder what happens if they cross a Bichon with a WHITE Toy Poodle -can't be a Bichon Noir then, can it!!

> Wonder how they work out he is 3 generations?& 3rd gen cross to cross would be the usual meaning but seems unlikely.

I'm guessing that only one cross to the Poodle is needed to get the black colour, and it's dominant (or semi) to the Bichon white. So a black puppy was kept from the first cross, then bred to a Bichon, black one kept, bred to a Bichon, rinse and repeat!

Not quite the recipe for a new breed :)

I've just seen a Bichon Noir website boasting that 'Black is the new White'.  Geeze, what a responsible statement, NOT.