The American Staffordshire Terrier in this photo looks to be a sweet dog: Sincere eyes, an engaging smile, and that cute head tilt.
But on these pages, we try to approach things with an eye toward edification.
One of the questions we often ask ourselves is why language in a breed standard is written the way it is. Why are hare feet important to some sighthounds? Why do most Nordic breed standards call for bushy tails?
We have also found that when the goal is education, a steady diet of photos of lovely dogs who exemplify their breed standards may be a feast for the eye, but they’re not helpful in learning to spot faults. Mind you, it’s not easy finding photos of such faults, and we greatly admire the fanciers who share such pictures in the spirit of education. Most of the time, however, when we do find such a picture, it was taken by someone who didn’t know any better because responsible breeding and/or the dog fancy is not their world.
We get it.
That said, we circle back to this AmStaff and why, in that spirit of education, we share why this little lady wouldn’t fare well in a show ring, and why she probably shouldn’t be bred.
It comes down to two sentences in the breed standard, but especially this one: Color: Any color, solid, parti, or patched is permissible, but all white, more than 80 per cent white, black and tan and liver not to be encouraged.
Note that “all white, more than 80 per cent white, and black and tan and liver” are not disqualifications, but neither are they to be encouraged. She can enter a dog show, but an well-informed judge won’t put her up.
There is also the matter of her eyes. The standard calls for eyes that are dark and round, and no pink eyelids. Our little lady falls short on both counts.
We conclude with the “why” of whiteness in this breed. According to the Louisiana State University Veterinary Medicine BAER clinic’s incidence tables, approximately 20% of all-white “bully-type” dogs (which includes American Staffordshire Terriers), are born deaf in one or both ears. This heightened risk is attributed to mutations in genes such as MITF, which are linked to white pigmentation and documented through BAER hearing testing and prevalence studies. The percentage of affected dogs drops sharply when the proportion of white in the coat is reduced, so when white comprises less than 80% of the coat, the incidence of deafness falls to less than 10%, demonstrating a direct correlation between extensive white coloring and congenital deafness risk.
This dog is likely a beloved companion deserving of her best life, and to the uninformed, breed standards may seem to be arbitrarily written documents geared toward dog shows.
Dog people know better. These standards serve as essential blueprints that preserve the unique traits and original working purposes of each breed, guiding responsible breeders in making sound breeding decisions and ensuring the health and welfare of future generations.
This is disgusting to read. Give me a white dog over a pug/frenchie any day. This dog has been health tested she is an AKC, UKC and International CH. she is titled in agility, lure, FastCats, temperament etc! Maybe do some research on what you are writing about before bashing the dog. Just because a judge in a show ring would give it a low score? The same judges that encourage docking/cropping and Brachycephalic breeds, yeah sorry if I don’t take their advice in this. Worry about temperament, and if the dog is actually healthy. Most people do not breed for the colour, and if they do they should not be breeding at all, but euthanasia of a healthy animal due to colour? Disgusting and unnecessary
Let’s correct the record, because several things in your comment aren’t in the article.
No one here suggested euthanasia, and no one bashed this dog. The article opens by calling her sweet, with sincere eyes, an engaging smile, and a cute head tilt, and it closes by saying she is likely a beloved companion deserving her best life. If you read a call for euthanasia in it, you read something that isn’t there.
What the article actually does is quote the breed standard and explain why it’s written that way. The standard says all white, more than 80 percent white, black and tan, and liver are “not to be encouraged.” As the article states, that is not a disqualification. She can enter a show. The standard also calls for dark, round eyes with no pink eyelids.
That language isn’t about looks for looks’ sake. According to the LSU BAER clinic’s tables, about 20 percent of all-white bully-type dogs are born deaf in one or both ears, and the rate falls below 10 percent when white makes up less than 80 percent of the coat. That is a health matter, not a beauty contest, and health is exactly what you say we should worry about.
Congratulations on her titles and her health testing. Those are real achievements, and BAER testing is precisely the testing this discussion is about. But an individual dog’s titles, or a clear test result, don’t rewrite the standard or erase the risk the standard guards against across the breed. Standards guide breeding decisions for future generations. They are not a verdict on one dog’s worth as a companion.
As for judges, docking, cropping, and brachycephalic breeds, that’s a different argument about different breeds. This article is about the AmStaff standard’s own words, written by the breed’s parent club. Temperament and health are the point, which is why the standard discourages breeding a pattern tied to deafness, however sweet the individual dog in front of us is.