# Are there getting to be more Malts with "lemon" patches



## Furbaby's Mommie (Jul 10, 2004)

I don't know if I'm just noticing now, or if I've actually seen more Malts (well bred ones) with patches of what is referred to as "lemon" but looks more beige, in their coats. We've all seen it the last many years on ears, especially as puppies, but in body areas? It probably isn't an actual problem, but I'd hate to see the Maltese eventually be a parti-colored dog. So far it is a very pale color and obviously doesn't keep a dog from being a wonderful pet, but can they be shown or bred with that?

Just curious......


----------



## jmm (Nov 23, 2004)

That coat color is a part of the pigment that gives Maltese their black points. Most of the time the color on the body (and often ears) fades as the dog matures. Roo, for example, had a huge patch of beige across his back...shortly after a year of age it had all faded away. So in a way if we want good pigment you will see color in the coat.


----------



## elly (Sep 11, 2006)

Mercedes has a patch on her back, I am glad it will go away.


----------



## ilovemymaltese (Oct 9, 2008)

Gigi still has the giant lemon spot on her back and ears. I know it's growing out of her ears but I'm not sure with her back. Oh well, I don't even notice it most of the time, never have really, unless I'm in good lighting.


----------



## Dixie's Mama (Mar 19, 2008)

Dixie has it on her ears and down the middle of her back too. With her hair shorter it shows more on her back. It has faded since she was a baby. She is 1 year 10 months now and it's still there. That's her and I don't care.


----------



## Furbaby's Mommie (Jul 10, 2004)

QUOTE (JMM @ Sep 28 2009, 10:44 AM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=834732


> That coat color is a part of the pigment that gives Maltese their black points. Most of the time the color on the body (and often ears) fades as the dog matures. Roo, for example, had a huge patch of beige across his back...shortly after a year of age it had all faded away. So in a way if we want good pigment you will see color in the coat.[/B]


I'm aware that when you have color on ears it will almost always means dark points. However I don't think that the dark ears were seen as often say--15 years ago, nor are "needed" to have dark points, and it has only been the last couple of years I've been seeing more color on the body.

My question is more about is it a (maybe dominant) trait that is carried in a lot of the breeding today? There has always been a lot of good pure white dogs with good pigment, and it seems like these colored body spots didn't used to be appearing in the coat so often.


----------



## Cosy (Feb 9, 2006)

Color in the coat has always been there both on ears and body in many maltese. It's not something new.
It can be from a site where there is dark pigment, or just growing that way without the site pigment. Sometimes
it fades and sometimes not. Unless it is very dark it is not really a bad thing...although show breeders don't like
to have it in the body coat.


----------



## bellaratamaltese (May 24, 2006)

QUOTE (Cosy @ Sep 28 2009, 02:40 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=834798


> Color in the coat has always been there both on ears and body in many maltese. It's not something new.
> It can be from a site where there is dark pigment, or just growing that way without the site pigment. Sometimes
> it fades and sometimes not. Unless it is very dark it is not really a bad thing...although show breeders don't like
> to have it in the body coat.[/B]


I agree. It isn't something that show breeders work to produce, but they aren't going to not show a nice puppy 'just' because of coat color. Shrinking the gene pool over coat color would lead to problems, I would think, since some lines can be more prone to coat color than others.

Lois looked like a dalmation as a puppy and now you can't even see the color. For me, coat color is at the bottom of my list. I'd rather see structure, pigment, good health, coat texture, balanced face and then towards the bottom, I'll worry about coat color. 

I'll be honest also and say that these types of posts concern me. It can be construed to the novice that any coat color is undesirable and any breeder who produces color in the puppies that are offered as pets are breeders to be 'avoided'. I really hope that doesn't happen!


----------



## lorraine (Jun 24, 2006)

I agree also but, for a show dog, it needs to be perfect in all other respects to persuade judges against your Kennel Club standards that say:
"White coat... Light tan or lemon on the ears is permissible, but not desirable."
or ours that say:
"Pure white, but slight lemon markings permissible."

My little lad has a white coat, imperfect black points on pads and zero halos BUT his ears are the colour of a beautiful sunset after a warm, sunny day and, to me, that makes him special and very desirable. :wub:


----------



## Ladysmom (Oct 19, 2004)

QUOTE (BellarataMaltese @ Sep 28 2009, 06:54 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=834824


> It isn't something that show breeders work to produce, but they aren't going to not show a nice puppy 'just' because of coat color.[/B]


I know it doesn't matter in a pet, but I thought lemon was only permitted on the ears if you are going to show? [attachment=57142:confused.gif]

Coat and Color - The coat is single, that is, without undercoat. It hangs long, flat, and silky over the sides of the body almost, if not quite, to the ground. The long head-hair may be tied up in a topknot or it may be left hanging. Any suggestion of kinkiness, curliness, or woolly texture is objectionable. Color, pure white. Light tan or lemon on the ears is permissible, but not desirable.

http://www.americanmaltese.org/ama_akc_breed_standard.htm


----------



## Cosy (Feb 9, 2006)

QUOTE (LadysMom @ Sep 28 2009, 06:21 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=834833


> QUOTE (BellarataMaltese @ Sep 28 2009, 06:54 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=834824





> It isn't something that show breeders work to produce, but they aren't going to not show a nice puppy 'just' because of coat color.[/B]


I know it doesn't matter in a pet, but I thought lemon was only permitted on the ears if you are going to show? [attachment=57142:confused.gif]

Coat and Color - The coat is single, that is, without undercoat. It hangs long, flat, and silky over the sides of the body almost, if not quite, to the ground. The long head-hair may be tied up in a topknot or it may be left hanging. Any suggestion of kinkiness, curliness, or woolly texture is objectionable. Color, pure white. Light tan or lemon on the ears is permissible, but not desirable.

http://www.americanmaltese.org/ama_akc_breed_standard.htm
[/B][/QUOTE]


Exhibitors and handlers know how to minimize coat color if necessary. It's just the way it is.


----------



## Furbaby's Mommie (Jul 10, 2004)

QUOTE (Cosy @ Sep 28 2009, 02:40 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=834798


> Color in the coat has always been there both on ears and body in many maltese. It's not something new.[/B]



I didn't think it was new, just more prevalent?

QUOTE (BellarataMaltese)


> I'll be honest also and say that these types of posts concern me. It can be construed to the novice that any coat color is undesirable and any breeder who produces color in the puppies that are offered as pets are breeders to be 'avoided'. I really hope that doesn't happen![/B]


I certainly hope that this does not turn into one of "those" posts too, Stacy. I'm NOT interested in any breeder discussions or pointing fingers. I guess it is more of a genetic discussion. I'm just interested in the future of our breed and a sane conversation. I've had a Maltese since 1992 and watched an evolution of changes in what is consider BOB in the ring, and simply wondered if we may see another one.


----------



## CloudClan (Jan 31, 2007)

I share Stacy's concern about this turning into one of those things where people worry overly much about coat color. One breeder expressed to me that in recent months more and more of her callers have been obsessed with wanting a "pure white" dog. She used to get people obsessed with wanting a dog under 5 pounds or calls from people wanting a dog a "baby-doll" face. It seems that the latest fad is asking for "pure white."

Cadeau's breeder had a girl with a very colorful coat. When she began showing her it was more dramatic, and she introduced me to the dog as her "Shi Tzu." Now, after her retirement from the ring, it is pure white. Cadie has color in her coat, but as I told her breeder when I got her, I do not mind color that will fade if it truly is linked with strong pigment. I personally prefer a coal black nose and black rims and halos to ice white. 

Now, if there is an increase in color in the coat in recent years I wonder if it may be the influence of all of those Marcris genes. I have heard it called Marcris Gold.  But I would think that this would be a hard thing to measure. I mean it is one of those things that may be there more because we are noticing it more you know. Of course, over time dramatic changes have taken place in the coat of the show Maltese. If I remember correctly I read that a couple of the first Maltese shown in the US were black and white. We certainly do not have that any longer in the ring.


----------



## jeannief (Aug 6, 2009)

Mason has some color on his back now, also. He had some on his ears, but that is fading, but the color on his back started a couple of months ago. He is a little over 8 months. I was told by his groomer that it is pigment and he does have a very black nose, black pads on all paws, and haloes. I just assumed he wasn't perfect, but he is so cute and adorable that I didn't care. Actually the color on his back looks like it is mostly white now near his skin, so we'll see. He isn't a show dog, just my puppy.


----------



## iheartbisou (Feb 13, 2007)

Bisou has/had a tad bit of yellow on her ears but it's at the tip and had been growing out white since. But personally, just for me, I wouldn't mind if she had more or not. It has no bearing whatsoever for me. Also, I'd prefer nice pigment on the nose and the halos than being ice white too. When I was looking for a Maltese, that (the color of her coat) was probably the last thing that was important to me...if fact I didn't even think of it because it's not so important compared to other things (structure, temperament, health etc).

Besides after a good long walk around Shanghai, there's nothing white about her anymore! lol.


----------



## angelgirl599 (Apr 8, 2009)

Lola has beige (lemon?) ears. I thought they were the cutest thing when I got her. It gave her character! LOL plus she had these cute little curls at the tips of her ears before her first grooming. :wub: 
But now that she's at 6 months, they are lightening up and after her first cut, the little curl is gone. I have to say, I'll miss them if they completely disappear. They're so darn cute!

"Color, pure white. Light tan or lemon on the ears is permissible, but not desirable." When I first got her I was a little apprehensive because of this statement from AMA. I think it could be worded better (JMO anyway). Just by reading that phrase, you wouldn't know that a little color on the ears or on the back means better black points and they don't mention that sometimes the color fades as the maltese gets older!


----------



## Furbaby's Mommie (Jul 10, 2004)

B) My original post question was not about our dear pets, or about color on ears. We all would agree that our Malts have slightly colored ears and that for a pet we are not going to worry about the pure whiteness of their coats. I just wondered if the patches or slight color in coats (not ears) is more prevalent today than in the many years past, and would it eventually be an excepted thing in the Maltese Standard. :confused1: It is probably only of interest to Maltese breeders for show and it appears to me that they must deal with it without talking about it. Like a lot of cosmatic things.

Sorry I mentioned it.......... :beating a dead horse: ..........Seems like to me that asking a question like this immediately draws the conculsion that it is going to cause "trouble" here, or is flaming the breeders. Sorry that is not even in my mind. I admire the good hard working breeders and am only a person with a curious inquiring mind. I'll go back to my corner now. :hiding:


----------



## I found nemo (Feb 23, 2006)

QUOTE (Furbaby's Mommie @ Sep 29 2009, 10:59 AM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=835058


> B) My original post question was not about our dear pets, or about color on ears. We all would agree that our Malts have slightly colored ears and that for a pet we are not going to worry about the pure whiteness of their coats. I just wondered if the patches or slight color in coats (not ears) is more prevalent today than in the many years past, and would it eventually be an excepted thing in the Maltese Standard. :confused1: It is probably only of interest to Maltese breeders for show and it appears to me that they must deal with it without talking about it. Like a lot of cosmatic things.
> 
> Sorry I mentioned it.......... :beating a dead horse: ..........Seems like to me that asking a question like this immediately draws the conculsion that it is going to cause "trouble" here, or is flaming the breeders. Sorry that is not even in my mind. I admire the good hard working breeders and am only a person with a curious inquiring mind. I'll go back to my corner now. :hiding:[/B]


I didn't see anything wrong with your question at all :blink:


----------



## bellaratamaltese (May 24, 2006)

QUOTE (Furbaby's Mommie @ Sep 29 2009, 07:59 AM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=835058


> B) My original post question was not about our dear pets, or about color on ears. We all would agree that our Malts have slightly colored ears and that for a pet we are not going to worry about the pure whiteness of their coats. I just wondered if the patches or slight color in coats (not ears) is more prevalent today than in the many years past, and would it eventually be an excepted thing in the Maltese Standard. :confused1: It is probably only of interest to Maltese breeders for show and it appears to me that they must deal with it without talking about it. Like a lot of cosmatic things.
> 
> Sorry I mentioned it.......... :beating a dead horse: ..........Seems like to me that asking a question like this immediately draws the conculsion that it is going to cause "trouble" here, or is flaming the breeders. Sorry that is not even in my mind. I admire the good hard working breeders and am only a person with a curious inquiring mind. I'll go back to my corner now. :hiding:[/B]


I know you weren't trying to cause trouble! The only reason why I said anything precautionary was because i know it's already a 'unrealistic' requirement that some pet owners expect from breeders, that all white coat. A lurker or novice could read a thread like this and think 'ok, i should be expecting a coat with no color' and then when they see color in a coat, they can feel misled or taken advantage of. I have a friend in town who got a maltese from a very good breeder and all she can complain about is how the coat has color and she feels like she was taken advantage of and over-charged. We have definitely agreed to disagree on that subject. Yes her dog has some coat color but she also got a beautiful, sweet, healthy girl with an outstanding pedigree. So if she were to see this thread, she would feel like she has a 'reason' to complain.

Yes, I know what the standard says but I wouldn't not show a nice puppy just because of coat color. If that was the case, I'd have petted out Lois from the start, since as I said, she looked like a dalmation as a young pup. Is it a problem now? No it is not. Will I take it into consideration when I breed her? yes but it will be at the bottom of my list of things I'd like to 'correct'. I'd rather have a nicer coat texture, if I had a choice.

I know I already said it but I do feel it would be a big problem if breeders suddenly started breeding exclusively for that all white coat. Soo many things could get lost (temperament, coat texture, structure, bites, etc) That is my only concern with posts like these, that puts breeders in a bad position, it can cause more harm than good

I would also like to add that breeders do discuss it, it is just discussed in a more private list. It is not just being swept under the rug, believe me! 

To answer your initial question - I honestly don't know if it's more prevalent today than it was years back! I also wonder if pigment was better or worse years ago?


----------



## Ladysmom (Oct 19, 2004)

QUOTE (CloudClan @ Sep 28 2009, 10:50 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=834927


> I share Stacy's concern about this turning into one of those things where people worry overly much about coat color. One breeder expressed to me that in recent months more and more of her callers have been obsessed with wanting a "pure white" dog. She used to get people obsessed with wanting a dog under 5 pounds or calls from people wanting a dog a "baby-doll" face. It seems that the latest fad is asking for "pure white."[/B]



QUOTE (Furbaby's Mommie @ Sep 29 2009, 10:59 AM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=835058


> B) My original post question was not about our dear pets, or about color on ears. We all would agree that our Malts have slightly colored ears and that for a pet we are not going to worry about the pure whiteness of their coats. I just wondered if the patches or slight color in coats (not ears) is more prevalent today than in the many years past, and would it eventually be an excepted thing in the Maltese Standard. :confused1: It is probably only of interest to Maltese breeders for show and it appears to me that they must deal with it without talking about it. Like a lot of cosmatic things.
> 
> Sorry I mentioned it.......... :beating a dead horse: ..........Seems like to me that asking a question like this immediately draws the conculsion that it is going to cause "trouble" here, or is flaming the breeders. Sorry that is not even in my mind. I admire the good hard working breeders and am only a person with a curious inquiring mind. I'll go back to my corner now. :hiding:[/B]


Dee, I completely understand where you are coming from. While we all understand that pet quality Maltese can have lemon patches on their body, overbites or a number of physical characteristics that keep them from being "show quality", I don't think your original question has been answered.

How can there be a concern that asking for a pure white coat be a "fad" when the standard clearly states that the coat should be pure white? 

Do judges overlook lemon on the body despite the standard if the Maltese is under a year as it is assumed it will fade?

I honestly have noticed the increase in lemon patches in pet quality puppies from show breeders as Dee has. I just assumed it was a by-product of breeding for good pigment and that's why those puppies went to pet homes rather than the show ring. 

Like Dee, I am not trying to cause trouble or turn this into one of "those threads", but I honestly would like to understand if the standard has unofficially changed.


----------



## jmm (Nov 23, 2004)

What is pure white? There are many shades of white (ivory, ice white, pearly, etc.). Many breeders find certain coat textures go with a shade for certain lines. So perhaps that silky, indestructible, fast-growing coat tends to be an ivory shade. I'd want to breed that coat again vs. ice white that was frail and hard to grow. Coat isn't just color, its texture, viability, growth rate, etc. Actual beige in the coat goes along the same lines - awesome dog with some beige, I'm keeping it. This beige is acceptable by other standards, so the more we import and export (which is a good thing), I would expect for the US to see the beige as more acceptable. Being undesirable by our standard does not make it a fault. And that fact that it often fades with age adds to it being acceptable. I do not think it is a slippery slope. I think it is one factor of many to consider when selecting for the next generation. Coat color is much easier to change than a bad front. Again, perhaps undesirable, but on the scale of things not a big deal.


----------



## Ladysmom (Oct 19, 2004)

QUOTE (JMM @ Sep 29 2009, 12:20 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=835082


> What is pure white? There are many shades of white (ivory, ice white, pearly, etc.). Many breeders find certain coat textures go with a shade for certain lines. So perhaps that silky, indestructible, fast-growing coat tends to be an ivory shade. I'd want to breed that coat again vs. ice white that was frail and hard to grow. Coat isn't just color, its texture, viability, growth rate, etc. Actual beige in the coat goes along the same lines - awesome dog with some beige, I'm keeping it. This beige is acceptable by other standards, so the more we import and export (which is a good thing), I would expect for the US to see the beige as more acceptable. Being undesirable by our standard does not make it a fault. And that fact that it often fades with age adds to it being acceptable. I do not think it is a slippery slope. I think it is one factor of many to consider when selecting for the next generation. Coat color is much easier to change than a bad front. Again, perhaps undesirable, but on the scale of things not a big deal.[/B]


Thank you for your explanation, Jackie. So the beige is coming from foreign lines which is a good thing to enlarge the gene pool. Above all, we want to protect the health of Maltese. So we can expect the US to accept more beige in the coat in the future. I think that answers Dee's original question, at least it does for me.

"Pure white" is taken verbatim from the AMA standard which is why I have used the term. It wasn't meant to cause controversy. Being artistic, I also understand that there are many shades of white. I didn't interpret Dee's question to be about different shades of white, but rather lemon patches in the coat, but I think this thread got a little off track, so who knows? :biggrin:


----------



## CloudClan (Jan 31, 2007)

Dee,

Please do not take away from this that you should not have asked the question. I hope I did not make you feel like you shouldn't have asked. As Stacy said, this very question came up on a forum of show breeders a few months back. It was discussed at length and I think the predominant feeling from breeders was that they do worry about it, but it is on a low end of the priority list. For me it would certainly fall well below things like movement, structure, head, pigment, coat texture and temperment. 

In the discussion it was looked at how the other standards around the world addressed the issue and most of them seemed a bit more permissive of color in the coat than the AKC standard. Some people even considered that this should be considered for revision so that it reflects more accurately what is in the ring (and doesn't force so much bleaching). For example, here is the Canadian Kennel Club's standard as it relates to _colour "White colour is preferred, but light beige or lemon markings are permissible."_

The concern that Stacy and I are expressing is due to the fact that I have heard many Breeders complain about the unrealistic expectations that people sometimes have when they call to inquire about a puppy. Personally, I think those unrealistic expections are a by-product of something good that has happened. More and more people know enough to consider going to reputable breeders for a puppy that is closer to the Standard. The better educated buyer is a wonderful thing, right? Except the problem is that more and more people expect that they will get a dog that adheres to the standard in every way. And of course no dog is ever perfect, not even the great show dogs are without faults. If a breeder has one that is close to perfect that dog stays with them and is shown, not usually placed as a puppy. Yet, puppy buyers are more and more calling and asking for a dog that meets the standard in every way and in some cases goes beyond to include something that is under 5 pounds, is baby-doll faced, and has a pure white coat. There has been a lot of frustration I have heard from breeders about this forum in particular because it is assumed that some of the unreasonable expectations are coming from here. In fact, if we just look at the recent post by a breeder in the breeder section of the forum, we can see that kind of frustration related to the issue of size. 

QUOTE (LadysMom @ Sep 29 2009, 11:42 AM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=835072


> Dee, I completely understand where you are coming from. While we all understand that pet quality Maltese can have lemon patches on their body, overbites or a number of physical characteristics that keep them from being "show quality", I don't think your original question has been answered.
> 
> How can there be a concern that asking for a pure white coat be a "fad" when the standard clearly states that the coat should be pure white?
> 
> ...


Now Marj. I think you misunderstood what I was calling a "FAD." Perhaps I did not make myself very clear. I was not calling the words in the standard a fad. I was calling the sudden increase in calls requesting a "pure white" dog a recent fad according to the breeder I spoke to. All of her calls used to be about baby-doll faces. Lately, they are about pure white coats and she has had people refuse dogs with lemon patches on the ears. To me, this is perhaps a good thing. If such a small imperfection is causing such consternation with a puppy buyer, then they are not likely the ideal candidate for a puppy. 

I also feel I have to disagree with the point where you said that Dee's original question was not answered. I certainly was trying to answer her question when I said that since Marcris genes are very prevelant in the breed today and many people call the color in the coat "Marcris Gold" this may be part of the answer. I also said that a dffinitive answer is not possible because the question is rather subjective. Is it really an increase in color in the coats in the dogs in the show ring? Or is it just anecdotal? I have been around Maltese at least as long as both of you (18+ years). I am more able to see things than I was even a few years back before because of increased awareness. I suspect you both also have increased your own awareness. Maybe you are seeing it more not because of an increase, but because of an increase in your ability to notice.


----------



## Cosy (Feb 9, 2006)

QUOTE (CloudClan @ Sep 29 2009, 11:57 AM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=835087


> Dee,
> 
> Please do not take away from this that you should not have asked the question. I hope I did not make you feel like you shouldn't have asked. As Stacy said, this very question came up on a forum of show breeders a few months back. It was discussed at length and I think the predominant feeling from breeders was that they do worry about it, but it is on a low end of the priority list. For me it would certainly fall well below things like movement, structure, head, pigment, coat texture and temperment.
> 
> ...





> Dee, I completely understand where you are coming from. While we all understand that pet quality Maltese can have lemon patches on their body, overbites or a number of physical characteristics that keep them from being "show quality", I don't think your original question has been answered.
> 
> How can there be a concern that asking for a pure white coat be a "fad" when the standard clearly states that the coat should be pure white?
> 
> ...


Now Marj. I think you misunderstood what I was calling a "FAD." Perhaps I did not make myself very clear. I was not calling the words in the standard a fad. I was calling the sudden increase in calls requesting a "pure white" dog a recent fad according to the breeder I spoke to. All of her calls used to be about baby-doll faces. Lately, they are about pure white coats and she has had people refuse dogs with lemon patches on the ears. To me, this is perhaps a good thing. If such a small imperfection is causing such consternation with a puppy buyer, then they are not likely the ideal candidate for a puppy. 

I also feel I have to disagree with the point where you said that Dee's original question was not answered. I certainly was trying to answer her question when I said that since Marcris genes are very prevelant in the breed today and many people call the color in the coat "Marcris Gold" this may be part of the answer. I also said that a dffinitive answer is not possible because the question is rather subjective. Is it really an increase in color in the coats in the dogs in the show ring? Or is it just anecdotal? I have been around Maltese at least as long as both of you (18+ years). I am more able to see things than I was even a few years back before because of increased awareness. I suspect you both also have increased your own awareness. Maybe you are seeing it more not because of an increase, but because of an increase in your ability to notice.
[/B][/QUOTE]

I agree, Carina. Many don't notice until it's pointed out to them. I think there is color in all lines and not just the Marcris line...which, by the way, is also a combination of other lines. 
Toy has an ice white coat, but she is also sensitive to some shampoos and is a head rubber as the slightest little thing makes her itch. 
Cosy had lemon on her ears as a young pup but has a great strong coat as an adult.


----------



## jmm (Nov 23, 2004)

QUOTE (LadysMom @ Sep 29 2009, 11:56 AM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=835086


> QUOTE (JMM @ Sep 29 2009, 12:20 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=835082





> What is pure white? There are many shades of white (ivory, ice white, pearly, etc.). Many breeders find certain coat textures go with a shade for certain lines. So perhaps that silky, indestructible, fast-growing coat tends to be an ivory shade. I'd want to breed that coat again vs. ice white that was frail and hard to grow. Coat isn't just color, its texture, viability, growth rate, etc. Actual beige in the coat goes along the same lines - awesome dog with some beige, I'm keeping it. This beige is acceptable by other standards, so the more we import and export (which is a good thing), I would expect for the US to see the beige as more acceptable. Being undesirable by our standard does not make it a fault. And that fact that it often fades with age adds to it being acceptable. I do not think it is a slippery slope. I think it is one factor of many to consider when selecting for the next generation. Coat color is much easier to change than a bad front. Again, perhaps undesirable, but on the scale of things not a big deal.[/B]


Thank you for your explanation, Jackie. So the beige is coming from foreign lines which is a good thing to enlarge the gene pool. Above all, we want to protect the health of Maltese. So we can expect the US to accept more beige in the coat in the future. I think that answers Dee's original question, at least it does for me.

[/B][/QUOTE]

Marj, you misunderstood me. Beige is permissible by many other Maltese standards. So those breeders would not view it as a fault. If we are intermingling with these lines, we also have to accept the color as permissible instead of undesirable. *That doesn't mean we don't have color in U.S. lines or it has only come from elsewhere*, just that the concept of permissible vs. undesirable, vs. a fault may change to coincide with multiple other standards if we are sending dogs back and forth.


----------



## Ladysmom (Oct 19, 2004)

QUOTE (CloudClan @ Sep 29 2009, 12:57 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=835087


> Dee,
> 
> Please do not take away from this that you should not have asked the question. I hope I did not make you feel like you shouldn't have asked. As Stacy said, this very question came up on a forum of show breeders a few months back. It was discussed at length and I think the predominant feeling from breeders was that they do worry about it, but it is on a low end of the priority list. For me it would certainly fall well below things like movement, structure, head, pigment, coat texture and temperment.
> 
> ...





> Dee, I completely understand where you are coming from. While we all understand that pet quality Maltese can have lemon patches on their body, overbites or a number of physical characteristics that keep them from being "show quality", I don't think your original question has been answered.
> 
> How can there be a concern that asking for a pure white coat be a "fad" when the standard clearly states that the coat should be pure white?
> 
> ...


Now Marj. I think you misunderstood what I was calling a "FAD." Perhaps I did not make myself very clear. I was not calling the words in the standard a fad. I was calling the sudden increase in calls requesting a "pure white" dog a recent fad according to the breeder I spoke to. All of her calls used to be about baby-doll faces. Lately, they are about pure white coats and she has had people refuse dogs with lemon patches on the ears. To me, this is perhaps a good thing. If such a small imperfection is causing such consternation with a puppy buyer, then they are not likely the ideal candidate for a puppy. 

I also feel I have to disagree with the point where you said that Dee's original question was not answered. I certainly was trying to answer her question when I said that since Marcris genes are very prevelant in the breed today and many people call the color in the coat "Marcris Gold" this may be part of the answer. I also said that a dffinitive answer is not possible because the question is rather subjective. Is it really an increase in color in the coats in the dogs in the show ring? Or is it just anecdotal? I have been around Maltese at least as long as both of you (18+ years). I am more able to see things than I was even a few years back before because of increased awareness. I suspect you both also have increased your own awareness. Maybe you are seeing it more not because of an increase, but because of an increase in your ability to notice.
[/B][/QUOTE]

Thank you for your detailed explanation, Carina. It definitely helps me understand color in the coat from the perspective of someone who shows. 

Are those of you who show finding that judges overlook lemon on the body despite the standard, realizing as you do that it is just a by-product of introducing foreign lines into the breed?

As far as potential buyers and unrealistic expectations, I would think it wouldn't really matter to dedicated breeders who breed to improve Maltese. I think it would apply more to backyard breeders who breed for profit and therefore cater to what the consumer is looking for and fads. I have seen this happen to Yorkies with disastrous results. The Yorkie standard only states that they should be under 7 pounds, so they are being bred smaller and smaller by backyard breeders because that's what the buyer seems to want. Broken legs from simple things like jumping off a chair are rampant on the Yorkie forum I belong to. :thmbdn:

I honestly think the economy has more to do with breeders having more difficulty selling puppies than they did a few years ago than unrealistic expectations about looks. People can't even sell their houses today. Perhaps the supply of Maltese puppies is just greater than the demand at this point.


----------



## Ladysmom (Oct 19, 2004)

QUOTE (JMM @ Sep 29 2009, 01:30 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=835100


> QUOTE (LadysMom @ Sep 29 2009, 11:56 AM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=835086





> QUOTE (JMM @ Sep 29 2009, 12:20 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=835082





> What is pure white? There are many shades of white (ivory, ice white, pearly, etc.). Many breeders find certain coat textures go with a shade for certain lines. So perhaps that silky, indestructible, fast-growing coat tends to be an ivory shade. I'd want to breed that coat again vs. ice white that was frail and hard to grow. Coat isn't just color, its texture, viability, growth rate, etc. Actual beige in the coat goes along the same lines - awesome dog with some beige, I'm keeping it. This beige is acceptable by other standards, so the more we import and export (which is a good thing), I would expect for the US to see the beige as more acceptable. Being undesirable by our standard does not make it a fault. And that fact that it often fades with age adds to it being acceptable. I do not think it is a slippery slope. I think it is one factor of many to consider when selecting for the next generation. Coat color is much easier to change than a bad front. Again, perhaps undesirable, but on the scale of things not a big deal.[/B]


Thank you for your explanation, Jackie. So the beige is coming from foreign lines which is a good thing to enlarge the gene pool. Above all, we want to protect the health of Maltese. So we can expect the US to accept more beige in the coat in the future. I think that answers Dee's original question, at least it does for me.

[/B][/QUOTE]

Marj, you misunderstood me. Beige is permissible by many other Maltese standards. So those breeders would not view it as a fault. If we are intermingling with these lines, we also have to accept the color as permissible instead of undesirable. *That doesn't mean we don't have color in U.S. lines or it has only come from elsewhere*, just that the concept of permissible vs. undesirable, vs. a fault may change to coincide with multiple other standards if we are sending dogs back and forth.
[/B][/QUOTE]


Okay, I think I've got it. :smstarz:


----------



## CloudClan (Jan 31, 2007)

QUOTE (LadysMom @ Sep 29 2009, 01:43 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=835106


> Thank you for your detailed explanation, Carina. It definitely helps me understand color in the coat from the perspective of someone who shows.
> 
> Are those of you who show finding that judges overlook lemon on the body despite the standard, realizing as you do that it is just a by-product of introducing foreign lines into the breed?
> 
> ...



LOL, I don't know what the judges are looking for. :huh: I wish I did. I often wish we were like the European shows where you get an explanation. In obedience you see where you lost points, here it is _again "subjective." _Some judges would penalize color more than others I am sure. Just as you have judges who are head-hunters (always go for the prettier head rather than the nice mover for example) or you have the judges who focus more on movement and less on coat or grooming, there really are all kinds of things that go into the evaluation. It is really hard to figure it all out until you have been around a while and even then you are still guessing at motivations. :confused1: 

As an exhibitor if you are competing against other handlers whose dogs have color in their coats you may feel you can get away without bleaching. But of course, the reality is that color is one of those things that can be hidden. There are some out there showing who have dogs with a "blu-ish" tinge to the coat (from the bleach). However, repeated bleaching will damage the coat texture and can wreak havoc on length, so most would prefer to not have to do that. 

Since, I now have a dog with color in her coat (who is an awesome mover) I may have to figure out how selective I have to be in showing her to which judge at least until she is old enough that it fades as I really do not want to have to bleach.  

I agree with you about the economy being a major issue in placing puppies for even the show breeders. So many of them are scaling back. Most of those very well known show breeders are used to the situation being controled by the supply they had. With the drop off in demand, the puppy buyers are able to be more demanding. But I can understand the frustration. Not only are they having to make tough decisions about doing less breeding (which for many of them means they are not going to be producing the next show dog for themselves and they may have to retire dogs before their time) but they are also dealing with calls from puppy buyers who are a bit more empowered and therefore demanding. 

I know from my time placing dogs in rescue that getting so many calls from people with unrealistic expectations can be very frustrating. For example, I used to get calls often from people who wanted a female under age 1, under 4 pounds. The requirements might go on and on. As you can imagine, when I have a beautiful 3 year old girl with a lovely tempterment who weighs 7 pounds, I think I have a prize that anyone who _really wants a rescue dog_ would be thrilled to have. It drove me crazy. :hysteric: But eventually, the right family comes along and makes all those frustrating encounters fade away. :happy:


----------



## Ladysmom (Oct 19, 2004)

I actually think an educated puppy buyer benefits show breeders rather than hurts them. An "empowered" buyer, as you call them, is more likely to seek out a show breeder for their puppy than a pet store or backyard breeder.

An educated buyer will be more particular, but hat's true with all major purchases such as a car, appliance, etc. It's not limited to puppies.  

I think this economy has forced many of us to cut back on our hobbies and recreational activities. I don't think show breeders are any different.


----------



## Furbaby's Mommie (Jul 10, 2004)

QUOTE (LadysMom @ Sep 29 2009, 02:37 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=835196


> I actually think an educated puppy buyer benefits show breeders rather than hurts them. An "empowered" buyer, as you call them, is more likely to seek out a show breeder for their puppy than a pet store or backyard breeder.
> 
> An empowered buyer, as you call them, will be more particular. That's true with all major purchases such as a car, appliance, etc. It's not limited to puppies. [/B]


I'm going off subject on my own post, but you are so right Marj. An educated, experienced Maltese (pet) person has more refined tastes and an eye for a beautiful dog. Thus knowing the standards and having seen the near perfect show dog does require more of the breeder. Even though Health, Temperament and Personality are #'s 1,2, & 3 most of us (or anyway I do) want the ideal in standard Maltese. We know we are taking what's left after the breeder chooses their show dogs, but we always hope they'll have one too many and let us have one of the best. Beauty that you are proud of, beauty you appreciate more since you have learned more about the breed and how to look at them. We would like them to be just a hair too small, or big or too many boys for the breeder's program--something like that, not obvious faults. Besides the sweet personality and love we get from our Malts, there is also a Wow factor. I get all fluttery inside when wherever I go people can't get over how beautiful my Shoni is. Somewhat like when my daughter was a baby and I couldn't shop with her along without being stopped by everyone in the market who thought she was amazing! 

So we develop our taste in Maltese and then go looking amongest the breeders' culls. They don't breed for us, they breed to produce champions who can produce champions. I'm not being derogatory toward the breeders, that is just the way it works. Unless we want to become a breeder and try to breed our perfect dog and go through all the heartache and work it takes to find that showable puppy! 

So the more of us pet people with good taste we create, the more "demanding" the buyers of the breeders' culls (I say the revently) are-- B)


----------



## CloudClan (Jan 31, 2007)

QUOTE (LadysMom @ Sep 29 2009, 05:37 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=835196


> I actually think an educated puppy buyer benefits show breeders rather than hurts them. An "empowered" buyer, as you call them, is more likely to seek out a show breeder for their puppy than a pet store or backyard breeder.
> 
> An educated buyer will be more particular, but hat's true with all major purchases such as a car, appliance, etc. It's not limited to puppies.
> 
> I think this economy has forced many of us to cut back on our hobbies and recreational activities. I don't think show breeders are any different.[/B]



I don't know if it is me not expressing myself well today or not, but I do not mean to claim that the problem is the "empowerment" of the buyers. It is that more and more seem to be coming with unrealistic expectations (or maybe it just seems so to the breeders I have spoken to). As I say, years back (long before the issues with the economy) I faced unrealistic expectations in prospetive adopters. I was very bothered by the way people seemed to think I could just pick a puppy off a shelf and give them what they want as if I had some kind of "shop" where I cooked them up made to order. 

And that is why I, frankly, have a problem with a dog being compared to a car or an appliance. Or as some seem to want the kind of arm candy you see in a coach handbag. It is not like a breeder has a genetic laboratory where they can manufacture the ideal that people crave. Reputable breeders do their best to produce beautiful, healthy, and loving dogs. They want to know that pet buyers will appreciate them. Yes, they want people to be proud to show them off as Dee is saying when she talks about how fun it is to have someone admire the sheer beauty of our beloved pets. But I believe they find it troubling when people get hung up on small imperfections that are inherent in any living creature.


----------



## MaryH (Mar 7, 2006)

Since this thread has already headed off topic I'm going to respond to the "cull" aspect of it first. There are any number of reasons why a puppy is placed as a pet and it's not necessarily about what is wrong with it. I wonder how many of you realize that you DO own show quality dogs that were sold to you as pets because because the breeder was under a contractual obligation that stipulated that anything not kept by the breeder must be sold as a pet on a spay/neuter contract? How about those of you who own a show quality boy because the breeder wanted a girl? Or you own a show quality girl because the breeder wanted a boy? Or you own a show quality dog because the breeder only wanted to keep one out of a litter of four even though ALL of them were extremely good dogs?

As for what the breed standard says, there are NO disqualifications in our breed. The standard defines what the perfect dog should be. Good, honest judges are not "overlooking" coat color, weight, tail set, structure, bite, length of neck, silkiness of coat, ear set, size of eyes, pigment, topline, movement, or anything else about the dog. They are comparing each dog against the standard and selecting the dog on that particular day who they feel comes closest to meeting the standard. There is no perfect dog as there is no perfect human being.

I had a litter of four last spring and did not keep the overall best puppy. If I thought for one moment that the person who got that puppy thought of it as "cull" I'd honestly never breed another litter as long as I live.


MaryH


----------



## Furbaby's Mommie (Jul 10, 2004)

QUOTE (MaryH @ Sep 29 2009, 09:15 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=835286


> Since this thread has already headed off topic I'm going to respond to the "cull" aspect of it first. There are any number of reasons why a puppy is placed as a pet and it's not necessarily about what is wrong with it. I wonder how many of you realize that you DO own show quality dogs that were sold to you as pets because because the breeder was under a contractual obligation that stipulated that anything not kept by the breeder must be sold as a pet on a spay/neuter contract? How about those of you who own a show quality boy because the breeder wanted a girl? Or you own a show quality girl because the breeder wanted a boy? Or you own a show quality dog because the breeder only wanted to keep one out of a litter of four even though ALL of them were extremely good dogs?
> 
> As for what the breed standard says, there are NO disqualifications in our breed. The standard defines what the perfect dog should be. Good, honest judges are not "overlooking" coat color, weight, tail set, structure, bite, length of neck, silkiness of coat, ear set, size of eyes, pigment, topline, movement, or anything else about the dog. They are comparing each dog against the standard and selecting the dog on that particular day who they feel comes closest to meeting the standard. There is no perfect dog as there is no perfect human being.
> 
> ...


 :sorry: Mary my dear friend, at least that word brought you out of the woods.  I'm *sorry, sorry, sorry* for the "c" word!! I was not at my best at the moment of writing and do regret the word. However, not the point I had in mind. You know I love you and respect your views and feelings. You know I would never actually feel like any dog (animal) was a "cull". I did leave out many good reasons, as mentioned by you, why puppies end up as pets. I haven't been on the breeder end and so am not aware of contractual agreements, etc. :embarrassed: 
Thank you for explaining the use of the AKC "Standard". That does help explain the show ring and why some things even we novices can see, seem to go unnoticed by the judges.

My feelings as a non-breeder/show person is that any cosmetic changes aside from shampoos and conditioners should not be allowed on a dog (any breed) in the ring to be judged as the ideal for it's breed and should be thrown out of the ring. They are supposed to be judging dogs, not which handler/groomer is the best at dog makeup, bleaching, fancy hairdos, etc. I know at this point in the evolution of dog shows that is not going to be!!

Thank you all for your input in this conversation. I still don't know if color patches on Malt coats is more prevalent now, but it does seem so to me. That doesn't mean I don't love every one of them!
Dee


----------



## MaryH (Mar 7, 2006)

QUOTE (Furbaby's Mommie @ Sep 30 2009, 11:52 AM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=835376


> :sorry: Mary my dear friend, at least that word brought you out of the woods.  I'm *sorry, sorry, sorry* for the "c" word!! I was not at my best at the moment of writing and do regret the word. However, not the point I had in mind. You know I love you and respect your views and feelings. You know I would never actually feel like any dog (animal) was a "cull". I did leave out many good reasons, as mentioned by you, why puppies end up as pets. I haven't been on the breeder end and so am not aware of contractual agreements, etc. :embarrassed:
> Thank you for explaining the use of the AKC "Standard". That does help explain the show ring and why some things even we novices can see, seem to go unnoticed by the judges.
> 
> My feelings as a non-breeder/show person is that any cosmetic changes aside from shampoos and conditioners should not be allowed on a dog (any breed) in the ring to be judged as the ideal for it's breed and should be thrown out of the ring. They are supposed to be judging dogs, not which handler/groomer is the best at dog makeup, bleaching, fancy hairdos, etc. I know at this point in the evolution of dog shows that is not going to be!!
> ...



Thanks, Dee, for your kind words and support. Hopefully tonight I'll get some sleep ... no more tossing, turning and worrying. :smcry: 

I don't have an answer for you on coat color but I will ask some of my more experienced friends and if I get any enlightening information I will pass it on. Beverly Passe of Myi Maltese (up in your part of the country) was known for producing icy white very silky coats and good pigment as well. As for style vs. fad, I think everything is cyclical (same in the world of fashion). Just reading through some of the older posts here, at one time it was about a baby doll head, another time about cobby body, then about no tearstaining, then about tiny, then lots of pigment and halos, and most recently about a pure white coat ... and always about the number of champions in the pedigree. None of this in my mind makes for an educated buyer. I find the Maltese standard to be well-written, clear, concise, understandable, and not overly restrictive. It leaves room for style while maintaining breed type. To me an educated buyer is the person who is as versed about health as about halos.

MaryH


----------



## MaryH (Mar 7, 2006)

QUOTE (Furbaby's Mommie @ Sep 30 2009, 11:52 AM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=835376


> My feelings as a non-breeder/show person is that any cosmetic changes aside from shampoos and conditioners should not be allowed on a dog (any breed) in the ring to be judged as the ideal for it's breed and should be thrown out of the ring. They are supposed to be judging dogs, not which handler/groomer is the best at dog makeup, bleaching, fancy hairdos, etc. I know at this point in the evolution of dog shows that is not going to be!![/B]


More food for thought ... many of our judges are former breeders and/or handlers who know well all the tricks of the trade. And while a ringside spectator may think that a judge is seeing only the makeup, the fancy hairdo, or even who is at the other end of the lead and missing obvious things like coat color or size or a loose tail, the judges do see those things and and know them for what they are. It's never easy to judge a dog without having put your hands on the dog. It may have obvious coat color or be on the larger end of the standard but it may also have a perfect bite, a straight front, good shoulder layback. One would only know that by actually having their hands on each dog in the ring. I do think good breeders always strive for health, structure, temperament and beauty when making their breeding choices. For me personally, I'll take a good bite, a straight front, a well put together rear on a happy dog over an icy white coat any day. Because at the end of the day, my dogs need to be able to walk to the food bowl, chew their food once they get there and them come give me a kiss. :smootch: 

MaryH


----------



## Lacie's Mom (Oct 11, 2006)

I'm laughing about all of this because Lacie (who is from a very reputable show breeder) has lemon ears and a lemon patch on her back (which is more noticable when she's cut short). Her coat isn't truly an icy white but it is white and a nice coat texture.

Tilly, who was rescued from a pet store/puppy mill situation has no lemon anywhere and has a icy, icy, icy, icy white coat.

I could get into debates over the standard and about breeding problems and about enhancing the color for the show ring, etc., but I just wanted to share my own experience with coat color.


----------



## I found nemo (Feb 23, 2006)

QUOTE (Lacie's Mom @ Oct 8 2009, 02:51 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=837969


> I'm laughing about all of this because Lacie (who is from a very reputable show breeder) has lemon ears and a lemon patch on her back (which is more noticable when she's cut short). Her coat isn't truly an icy white but it is white and a nice coat texture.
> 
> Tilly, who was rescued from a pet store/puppy mill situation has no lemon anywhere and has a icy, icy, icy, icy white coat.
> 
> I could get into debates over the standard and about breeding problems and about enhancing the color for the show ring, etc., but I just wanted to share my own experience with coat color.[/B]


Nemo is from a pet-store and in no way standard. One thing is, he is super white and not one tear-stain  now go figure that one .


----------



## mamapajamas (Apr 12, 2009)

QUOTE (JMM @ Sep 29 2009, 12:20 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=835082


> What is pure white? There are many shades of white (ivory, ice white, pearly, etc.). Many breeders find certain coat textures go with a shade for certain lines. So perhaps that silky, indestructible, fast-growing coat tends to be an ivory shade. I'd want to breed that coat again vs. ice white that was frail and hard to grow. Coat isn't just color, its texture, viability, growth rate, etc. Actual beige in the coat goes along the same lines - awesome dog with some beige, I'm keeping it. This beige is acceptable by other standards, so the more we import and export (which is a good thing), I would expect for the US to see the beige as more acceptable. Being undesirable by our standard does not make it a fault. And that fact that it often fades with age adds to it being acceptable. I do not think it is a slippery slope. I think it is one factor of many to consider when selecting for the next generation. Coat color is much easier to change than a bad front. Again, perhaps undesirable, but on the scale of things not a big deal.[/B]


I seem to recall reading somewhere that the AKC recognizes something like 300 shades of white! :shocked: 

I've been wondering if Button's lemon spots... ears and on her back... might have something to do with her coat texture. Her coat is luxuriously silky and easy to care for! And I love the way it looks on her back, sort of like vanilla ice cream with caramel streaked through it. :wub:

I gained my confidence in her coat when I injured my back a couple of months ago. When I fell and fractured a disk, Button's grooming went straight to Hades in a handbasket. By the time the muscular damage in my back was healed enough to put some real time into dealing with her coat, she looked like a little ragmop, dirty and fur all ropey from layers of flea spray. I sat down with her, set to spend hours brushing and combing her out for a bath, but spent only about twenty minutes-- because she had NO mats!!! None whatsoever! :huh: Talk about a stunning surprise! All I had to do was just brush and comb her! No detangling, no mat splitting, nothing! 

She's nine months old now, and it doesn't look as if the color is fading. I hope it stays... I think it's gloriously beautiful! :cloud9:


----------



## Juanelle (Jan 1, 2010)

I know if you show, you want them to be almost "perfect". When I got my Coconut a year ago, I didn't know much about Maltese except they had good personalities and were white. I actually picked him because he had the beige color on his ears. I thought it was so cute. Now, he is a year old an it is starting to fade. My groomer says he is one of the better quality ones that she grooms. His halos are very dark and his hair is great. He doesn't have much tear stain either. I guess I just lucked up on qualities, but his biggest quality is that he is soooo sweet and of course spoiled rotten. I guess it all depends on what you want out of a dog as to what you look for!


----------



## Orla (Jul 5, 2009)

When I first got Milo he had lemon ears and a streak of lemon on his head - it was all gone by the time he was about 5/6 months old.


----------



## michellerobison (Dec 17, 2009)

I notice mine the lemon seems to be more noticeable at different times of the year maybe. Mine walk outside a lot in the warmer months,plus I noticed it less while in Florida since we were out more. I notice it more here since we're inside more. Also see it when I bathe them but once dry,it's hardly noticeable,depending on the light. The 2 rehomers I took in have just the slightest lemon on the ears,they're actually much brighter white than my girls but their coat is shorter too than my girls.
Who knows,maybe it's the water,seems to come and go.I might try a whitening shampoo,right now I use a clear,no dyes no perfumes, shampoo with Olive Oil for dryness.

What I realy notice is their noses in warm weather ,nice and black,they go more pink in winter,my little rosie noseys... :wub:


----------

