Plott Breed Standaed

Folks I have been seeing a lot of talk on the internet about the Plott standard and how it really doesn't coincide with either the original standard or the dogs of today. In your opinion how should the standard be changed? I know I am opening up a can of worms but let's try it anyway. Please keep your opinions honest and lets try not to get into a heated argument. Everyone is entitled to their opinion so try to respect each other. Let's also not dig up past history to knock someone or group. Let's try to be positive.

Thanks for your help and cooperation.

Money and pride have given way to much in our and all breeds. to me I would like to see the standards where they were when our breed was when it was recognized by the breed registries ( Ukc ) The first breed standard. But all in all to me they are more of a suggestion and I am good with any bodies choice of how they want to breed and let others make their choice of how they want their dogs color size and what not . I would like to see people held more accountable for their actions and complete honesty in papers .That to me is the most important in a breed.

the biggest issue that i heard and read about is the color issue.now or standard says brindle stripped effect no solid colors allowed.now we know we cant register the buckskinsbut why are we registering the all black plotts.now ive had people say look close right here there is some brown hair or here is a patch of brown,it says brindle effect not just a spot.m aybe we need to go to a percentage and say the dog has to have atleast 10% brindle on it.ive had plotts since 1970 have raised lots of pups and by time there 3-4 weeks old you can tell the brindle on them.there is nothin prettier on the bench than a shiney black dogs but our standard says no solid colors.and i think we havew some breeders strictly breeding for the black plotts for the show ring.i will say some fault has to go to the bench show judges that dont know the breed standard and are letting these dogs win on the same note i put the blame on breeders for not culling like they should.if you had pups that had to much white or were over or undershot on there bite you would cull them for being out of standard same thing as the color,we have 7 colors to choose from and all black isnt one of them.

fred harroun wrote:there is nothin prettier on the bench than a shiney black dogs but our standard says no solid colors.

I agree with you Fred except for this part of your statement.


I THINK THERE'S NOTHING PRETTIER ON THE BENCH THAN A WELL BRINDLED DOG!!

I also believe that the day HAS COME for the allowance of the Buckskin within our breed! Solely because DNA can prove that the pups are from said parents.
Maybe it would be necessary for both the parents to be DNA proofed as well in order to allow this change. BUT I THINK IT'S TIME.

Also as Shane stated, "There has to be the honesty and the accountability of the breeder to do what's right!"

Take it easy!!
Irv

irv im with you nothin prettier than a brindle hound but the judges seem to like the all black.

i agree with the dna now we could keep track but i would go a step farther and say a buckskin had to be bred to a brindle dog and a all black had to be bred to a brindle or buckskin and they all had to be dna,d. then you would start throwing brindled pups its been proven in akc with the danes,pitbulls,boxers and other breeds that hace the buckskin color in there breed.

I personally believe the elimination of the Buckskins from our Breed and the UKC or the NPHA allowance of solid black color dogs is changing our Breeds color, slowly, but surely. It's also eliminating dogs that possibly could enhance the Breed. Also allowing the black dogs, which goes against their own Standards, is also badly hurting the credibility of the NPHA. I have written many, many posts on several sites in the promotion of once again allowing the solid color dogs and the Standardization of one Standard for our Breed. A single Standard is ONLY a guideline for our Breed. But two Standards means division, confusion, nonconformity and provides a way or a excuse to allow others to push the guidelines, which means our great Breed is being harmed. But we must never forget why the solid color dogs were eliminated in the first place. Or why the Standards were changed, and the lesson we have learned from then until this point in time. It has been suggested many times that only Buckskins, or any solid color dog for that matter, should only be allowed to be registered ONLY if they come from two brindle parents. This will keep the great Brindle color of our Breed dominate over the solid colors and hopefully never again give the chance for some to try and breed for any color of dogs except the Brindle dogs. DNA testing is another tool we can use. But there is no ABSOLUTE way to stop anyone from registering pups that shouldn't be registered. Just has the NPHA has no way of stopping the breeding of Buckskin or solid color dogs now. Laws, rules and regulations only keep the honest, honest. And even though I believe our Breed is slowly being changed from what happened over fifty years ago. Once again having only one Standard to follow, which I hope also allows solid color dogs again, will once again allow our Breeds finest Breeders to once again produce all the dogs the forefathers of the Breed intended them to be producing. I don't think any of us ever wish to see again the day someone takes a opportunity to produce the Buckskin color of dog because it sells better or is more popular to some people. Hopefully our great Breed will always be judged by performance and color will never again becomes a issue. But first, only the NPHA can change what was done over fifty years ago and what I personally believe is doing to great harm our Breed. Only the NPHA can once again give themselves the creditability the Organization deserves and was intended to have by the Forefather of the Breed that created it. But hopefully we now have the lessons of our Breeds history to help the leaders of it get it right this time. JMO!!!

How are you going to put a "percentage" on the brindle on a Plott...Break it down to the sections like you would on beef stock...Example: R hind, L hind, L side, R side, R front, L front, Head, Ears, etc....If a man takes two pure bred Plotts and breed them together and have a litter of pups and one or two of them come out buckskin why shouldn't he be able to register this pup becuase in fact it came from two pure plotts...Makes no sense to me....One question I have always thought of is or does anyone have an idea of when the first known buckskins started showing up in litters of Plotts?....Maybe some of the older members could give a ball park idea to this question...Was it back in the John, Von Plott era or alot later in the breeding generations?.....Perkey

Perkey, Here's the part on color from what is thought by some to be the closest to the original Standards wrote in 38 and used by the UKC when they recognized the Breed in 45 that there is. Hopefully it answers your question of what is "brindled".

Color;
Any shade of brindle (a streaked or striped pattern of dark hair imposed on a lighter background) is preferred. This includes the following brindle factors: yellow, buckskin, tan, brown, chocolate, liver, orange, red, light or dark gray, blue or Maltese, dilute black, and black. Other acceptable Plott colors are solid black, any shade of brindle, with black saddle, and black with brindle trim. A rare buckskin, devoid of any brindle, sometimes appears among litters; ranging from red fawn, sandy red, light cream, and yellow ochre, to dark fawn and golden tan. Some white on chest and feet is permissible as is a graying effect around the jaws and muzzle.

The Buckskins could possibly go back to a couple of different infusions into the Breed. But many trace it back to possibly coming from the original 5 dogs brought from Germany in 1750. Supposedly, 3 were brindle, 2 were buckskin.

Dennis Fisher wrote:Perkey, Here's the part on color from what is thought by some to be the closest to the original Standards wrote in 38 and used by the UKC when they recognized the Breed in 45 that there is. Hopefully it answers your question of what is "brindled".

Color;
Any shade of brindle (a streaked or striped pattern of dark hair imposed on a lighter background) is preferred. This includes the following brindle factors: yellow, buckskin, tan, brown, chocolate, liver, orange, red, light or dark gray, blue or Maltese, dilute black, and black. Other acceptable Plott colors are solid black, any shade of brindle, with black saddle, and black with brindle trim. A rare buckskin, devoid of any brindle, sometimes appears among litters; ranging from red fawn, sandy red, light cream, and yellow ochre, to dark fawn and golden tan. Some white on chest and feet is permissible as is a graying effect around the jaws and muzzle.

The Buckskins could possibly go back to a couple of different infusions into the Breed. But many trace it back to possibly coming from the original 5 dogs brought from Germany in 1750. Supposedly, 3 were brindle, 2 were buckskin.

WOW ~ I was shocked to see the language stated in there accepting "Solid Black".

I have started several polls about this exact issue and all polls are overwhelming in favor of accepting buckskin dogs with some wanting some sort of control such as allready stated no buckXbuck or solid Xsolid and possibly dna of both parents and pups .

i think wew need to work hard at getting this issue resolved before it starts to sperate the npha.

if what dennis says was the original standard then i see no reason not to work towards it. as far as dna's i would have no problem w/that but many members would not want this because of cost to them.

my question then is, what is the arguement, if the original breed standard allowed black plotts, and buckskins? if they come from full blooded parents, then they are plotts. if you breed a full blooded buckskin and/or solid black plott to the same, are they not still full blooded plotts? I thought we were breeding for hunting traits, not color. JMO i think, alot of times, that the solid blacks and buckskins are not much in question until they "out do" a brindle dog, then some people will do what ever it takes, to try and get to the top. NOT directing that toward any individual, as i don't know what color of dogs anyone hunts, i don't have solid blacks or buckskins, just an observation i have made over the years.

I would like everyone to know I have no idea if those are absolutely the "original" Standards. I collected them off these Internet sites and others have said they are has close has any they've seen to the original. And some of those "others" are some of the most respect and knowing of our Breed. From what I understand, from when the Plott Breed and the NPHA was first started, the original Standards were posted at every UKC event until the NPHA created their "new" ones in 58. The original standards were resurrected in 62 by a group loyal to Von Plott and Isaah Kidd, who opposed the NPHA creating these new Standards and banning the buckskins, called the International Plott Hound Hunter Ass. and was used by that organization until it folded. Then in 87 they were resurrected again when the APA was started. Out of all that "History" there ought to be a copy of the original Standards out there somewhere to verify that they truly are the "Original".

tnhillbilly, The fear most have is what happened that got the buckskins banned in the first place. Some found that the buckskin were very popular and in those days $500 dollar pups were a common price. That was a bunch of money back then. But some felt the buckskin color would soon dominate the Breed if this kept up, just has some today feel the black is taking over the breed. The argument comes in how to keep others from doing exactly what you said, breeding for color instead of performance. Hope that helped!!!

Here's the full copy of the original Standards that I have. You might notice several differences between these and the NPHA's. Besides the Buckskin issue there's the erectal ears, feet, ear length, size, weight and a few more.


General Appearance
A hunting hound of striking color that traditionally brings big game to bay or tree, the Plott is intelligent, alert and confident. Noted for stamina, endurance, agility, determination and aggressiveness when hunting, the powerful, well muscled, yet streamlined Plott combines courage with athletic ability.

Size, Proportion, Substance
Size--Height--Males--20 to 25 inches at the withers. Females 20 to 23 inches at the withers. Proportion--General conformation and height in proportion. Faults: Extremely leggy or close to the ground. Weight--(in hunting condition) Males-- 50 to 60 pounds. Females 40 to 55 pounds. Substance--Moderately boned. Strong, yet quick and agile. Faults: Overdone. Carrying too much weight and or to much bone to display speed and dexterity.

Head
Head--Carried well up with skin fitting moderately tight. Faults: Folds, dewlap, skin stretched too tightly. Expression--Confident, inquisitive, determined. Fault: Sad expression. Eyes--Brown or hazel, prominent rather than deeply set. Faults: Drooping eyelids, red haw. Ears--Medium length, soft textured, fairly broad, set moderately high to high. Hanging gracefully with the inside part rolling forward toward the muzzle. Ear spread in males--18 to 20 inches. Ear spread in females--17 to 19 inches. When attentive or inquisitive, some Plotts display a semi-erectile power in their ears and lift them enough so a noticeable crease occurs on line with the crown. Disqualification: Length of ear extending beyond the tip of the nose or hanging bloodhound-like, in long, pendulous fashion. Skull--Moderately flat. Rounded at the crown with sufficient width between and above the eyes. Faults: Narrow-headed, square, oval or excessively domed. Muzzle--Moderate length, flews give it a squarish appearance. Faults: Bluntly squared. Pointed. Pigmentation--Eye rims, lips and nose are black. Flews--Black. Fault: Pendulous flews. Bite--Teeth-Scissors. Fault: Overshot or undershot.

Neck, Topline and Body
Neck--Medium length and muscular. Clean and free of ponderous dewlap. Fault: Loose, wrinkled or folded skin. Topline--Gently sloping, slightly higher at the withers than at the hips. Fault: Roached. Body-Chest--Deep. Ribs--Deep, moderately wide, well sprung. Back--Well muscled, strong, level. Loin--Slightly arched. Tail--Root is slightly below level of topline. Rather long, carried free, well up, saber like. Moderately heavy in appearance and strongly tapered. Sometimes typified by a slight brush.

Forequarters
Shoulders--Clean, muscular and sloping, indicating speed and strength. Elbow--Squarely set. Forelegs--Straight, smooth, well muscled. Pasterns--Strong and erect. Feet--Firm, tight, wellpadded and knuckled, with strong toes. Set directly under the leg. Disqualification--Splayed feet. Nails--Usually black, although shades of reddish brown matching the brindle body color are permissible and buckskin colored dogs have light red nails. May be white when portions of the feet are white.

Hindquarters
Angulation--Well bent at stifles and at the hocks. Hips--Smooth, round, and proportionally wide, indicating efficient propulsion. Legs--Long and muscular from hip to hock. From hock to pad short, strong and at right angles to the ground. Upper and second thigh--Powerful and well-muscled. Feet--Set back from under the body. Firm and tight. Toes--Strong.

Coat
Smooth, fine, glossy, but thick enough to provide protection from wind and water. rare specimens are double coated, with a short, soft, thick inner coat concealed by a longer, smoother and stiffer outer coat.

Color
Any shade of brindle (a streaked or striped pattern of dark hair imposed on a lighter background) is preferred. This includes the following brindle factors: yellow, buckskin, tan, brown, chocolate, liver, orange, red, light or dark gray, blue or Maltese, dilute black, and black. Other acceptable Plott colors are solid black, any shade of brindle, with black saddle, and black with brindle trim. A rare buckskin, devoid of any brindle, sometimes appears among litters; ranging from red fawn, sandy red, light cream, and yellow ochre, to dark fawn and golden tan. Some white on chest and feet is permissible as is a graying effect around the jaws and muzzle.

Gait
Dexterous and graceful, rhythmic footfall. With ample reach in front and drive behind, the Plott easily traverses various terrains with agility and speed. Legs converge to single track at speed.

Temperament
Eager to please, loyal, intelligent, alert. Aggressive, bold, and fearless hunter. Disposition generally even, but varies among strains, with a distinction sometimes appearing between those bred for big game and those bred as coonhounds.

Disqualifications
Length of ear extending beyond the tip of the nose or hanging bloodhound-like, in long, pendulous fashion. Splayed feet.

no matter what standard is used ;show people will breed for show, hunters will breed for ability ,always has been always will be. not trying to step on toes, some people do breed for both but it is a hard job. i like good conformation in a dog but it does not have to have show quality for me to keep it and mostly show people don't care about ability at all if it is really a good show quality. just the way people are, people all have their own reasons for what they like about a dog. i would really like to know what the original standard says. people say we should go by the standard and not change it , well then why has it been changed previously. i say they are right so let's go to what the original standard calls for . i have no idea what it called for exactly myself , but if found out i will go by it if people want it ......will they though? gotta go now and get some sleep. long drive to WV state hunt in a couple hours.

sorry imissed the last posting about the original standard, so like i said i will go by it...anybody else out here want to get it back in ?

There still are a few people that do not want to see solid colors the ones I know of feel they are inferior ( I do not agree I have never seen a solid black plott though to judge them but lots of buckskins .

Shane, go to the UKC site and look at the dog that the NPHA allows them to show has what our breed of dogs should look like. I believe the NPHA's standards do not allow solid black Plotts. But that's what is shown. This is the type of inconsistency's that I was mentioning. I will admit though, if you have a really, really good monitor you can verily make out what might be some very little brown color down towards this dogs feet. I will say it's a heck of a good look'n dog though. I hope this link works, ain't figured out how to post a picture yet. But anyways, sorry guys!!! That ain't the color of Plott I ever considered has the Standard of Plott that should be shown has what our great Breed should look like. But most importantly, what happen to the NPHA's Standard of only Brindled dogs. I know we have some dang good look'n BRINDLED dogs left some where out there to put up has our Breeds "Poster" dog.
.

http://www.ukcdogs.com/WebSite.nsf/Breeds/PlottHoundRevisedMarch12009

dennis the picture you are talking about is in black and white.that dog has alot of brindle on its legs chest and face,black with brindle trim just like the standard says.

Fred, I agree it meets "Standard" of color. But is it the "Poster" dog that the NPHA should be promoting our Breed with considering it's history and the part of the Standard that says this.

The Plott is a beautiful, strongly build yet moderate hound, with a distinct brindle colored coat. His appearance suggests the capacity for speed, stamina and endurance.

But I didn't mean to put that up to take away from this very important issue of the NPHA redoing their Standards. SORRY!!!

Fred, Also to be totally fair and open, also on the UKC site the Plott Breed made #9 of UKC top Breeds. Now this is just my opinion of course, but that's much more of a "Poster" type Plott for being "brindled".


http://www.ukcdogs.com/WebSite.nsf/WebPages/LrnTop10

People breed to their buckskins now when they are not registered legally. How would registering them and saying they cannot be bred help not breeding to them. There are so many people that breed for color already. Why would a person breed just for color. It has no effect on how well the dog does on game of any sort but they do not care. They breed for color. You allow buckskins in our breed and you will see people breed for color and there will be buckskin to buckskin. We already have mostly black dogs and my personal feelings is they need to start addressing that issue also. We have brindle dogs with no solid color allowed lets keep that way.

Why would we want to keep it the way it is now when it is clear how the founders of the breed felt and when they were recognized as a breed. Color has absolutely nothing to why the plott breed has been able to perform to a high standard in the biggame world. I highly doubt that allowing bucksins ( or solid colors ) to be bred and given papers for or puppy papers for offspring much more than allready is happening.