White boxer breedings - Page 4

mara806 · #31 01-10-2005, 03:41 PM

Please dont be mad at me for asking this, but I read the entire thread of messages and I still don't understand one thing. If she were bred to a homozygous dominant plain boxer there would be no chance of white dogs being born, right? White is a recessive trait and would only show up if the other dog carried the same trait. I DO care about my dog and she will not be bred... I just wanted to know.

**gmacleod** · #32 01-10-2005, 04:05 PM

Sure, but the trick would be identifying the homozygous dominant. See this post: http://www.boxerworld.com/forums/sho...79&postcount=8

But whether or not any puppies are born white isn't the issue. Not breeding white boxers isn't about not producing more whites - they will continue to be produced in large numbers by the breeding of flashy with flashy. The issue is deafness - which is a genetically inherited condition. The offspring of white boxers, whether coloured or white, have a higher risk of deafness than the offspring of coloured dogs. And as it is genetically inheritable, the offspring of those puppies, in turn, will have higher risk... See this post: http://www.boxerworld.com/forums/sho...3&postcount=14

mara806 · #33 01-10-2005, 04:10 PM

I thought the deafness was caused by lack of melanin in the ears of the white boxers? but i'll take your word for it.

**gmacleod** · #34 01-10-2005, 04:29 PM

You've no idea how happy that makes me.

But don't take my word for it. You're a biology student, read these instead:
http://www.boxerworld.com/forums/sho...63&postcount=6
http://www.steynmere.com/DALM_DEAFNESS.html (the white colour in boxers is also due to the sw allele)

Upstatestuff · #35 04-01-2005, 11:11 PM

So I thought that the white boxer couldn't be registered? Also what is considered a white boxer anyway? Completely white? Or is it like 3/4 or more of the body is white? Just curious...

JulieM · #36 04-02-2005, 10:08 AM

The Kennel Clubs (American and Canadian, and at least some in FCI countries - not sure about Australia/New Zealand/UK) will register white Boxers. The Boxer Clubs have Codes of Ethics/Conduct which prohibit or limited it. In the US, the American Boxer Club has just (9/04) change their Code of Ethics to allow breeders to give Limited Registration on spayed/neutered whites; it is law that a purebred dog in Canada is able to be registered, so Canadians have been able to register them for years but the Boxer Club of Canada requires they are spayed/neutered first.

As far as the standard/disqualification and Codes of Ethics go, "white" is really any dog with more than 1/3 white. Generally speaking, a dog with slightly more than 1/3 would probably be called "overly flashy"; a dog with 2/3 or more would be calld "white". That in-between is sometimes called "parti-colored" or "check" - but is not very common, in North America at least.

carolshafer · #37 12-13-2005, 01:25 PM

Oh my goodness...I only made it through four pages of the threads before I decided I had to reply. Both of my girls, "white" can hear and they respond to both commands, hearing (thanks to their Dad) and non-hearing...sign language... because of their Mom. I am a Boxer lover, not a breeder of any kind. My Hannah had a littermate born deaf. Her parents were flashy fawn and flashy brindle. Now, I may be deaf but I am not stupid. I realize ancestry. Going back SIX generations...there were NINE white Boxers...of which only "ONE" (Hannah's littermate) was deaf. I will not breed my girls but not because they may produce a 'deaf' offspring...but because as I said...I am not a breeder. God love those breeders because without them I would not have my girls.
I realize you are trying to inform people...that is the reason I am not in the least bit offended. This is just my "two cents". Thank you for allowing me to speak my peace. I love you all and applaud you!

**gmacleod** · #38 12-13-2005, 01:57 PM

I'm glad you're not offended. But I still think you miss the point. It isn't about colour, and it isn't about individual dogs being deaf. It is about responsible breeding practices. It is not responsible, and never will be, to deliberately breed a known physical defect into a breed. Breeding a dog whose offspring (and future generations) are likely to lose the use of a major sensory organ solely because of those breeding practices is irresponsible in the extreme.

It is no different to deliberately breeding a dog with a known (and inheritable) heart condition. One puppy in a litter dropping dead at an early age is too many when the cause is a preventable genetic condition. And one puppy in a litter that loses the ability to hear is also too many - when it is similarly preventable.

That will be the end of this thread. It's point was to educate people about why white boxers must never be used for breeding (which, you might like to take note, is entirely different to whether or not they should be produced or whether or not they can make wonderful pets). Comments like "I may be deaf, but I'm not stupid" really have no place in that sort of discussion. It's not about you. And it's not about deaf dogs. It's entirely about breeding only from stock that do not carry inheritable genetic defects. That includes heart conditions, it includes hip dysplasia, it includes defective immune systems, and it includes deafness. No dog with the genes to pass those conditions on to their offspring and subesquent generations can ever responsibly be used for breeding.