No, they should not. They would be more like a GSP, Viszla or Pointer tail - an extension of the spine.
White on paws? I guess could come from the Brittany. I don’t really know much about color genetics either; but I believe white is a masking gene in my breed, I think that means it’s dominant?
Two hints - not a Golden, not a Chow. 
Spitz is a good guess.
Pom?
Close, but bigger. It’s Keeshond.
Here is a puppy photo and I think the only thing I see in that puppy is the eye shape. But 5/6 of the puppies were a color that doesn’t exist in that breed. So, they took the color(ish) from one breed and a good part of the structure from the other. But together, it looks kind of like a Golden mixed with a Pom or something.
You are right, I would never have guessed Keeshond! But now I see what you mean about the eye shape! And that would certainly explain the tail curled over the back!
Side comment - Kees are beautiful dogs. I haven’t seen one since I stopped showing dogs many decades ago - until last week. We were at the head of the checkout line at Lowes with our Welsh Terrier, and she started a soft, low growl. We looked up and a lady had just gotten in line with a gorgeous (and big!) Keeshond. He was wagging his tail at our dog but she (in typical Welsh Terrier fashion) was not in the mood for a meet and greet, no matter how handsome he was. LOL.
Taking a quick glance at the AKC page for Keeshonds, they list “tawny” and “white” as possible (though non-standard) colors. White would be ee (recessive red/yellow) and possible that tawny could be as well, with just a different intensity factor to the white. So recessive red/yellow is in the breed, if not common.
Since some pups are yellow, that means the Keeshond parent had to be Ee. The Brittney parent is ee. That means each pup had a 50/50 chance of being black or yellow.
I like color testing a lot more than breed testing!
I suppose it’s possible. No one breeds for that color so it would be hard to know how common it is or if it is the recessive color.
I do know that in Brittanys orange is recessive; but don’t know how that plays with the white pattern (which I have heard is a separate gene) which is always present to some degree. The other standard color is liver, and it is the dominant color. Orange Brittanys are more common, but liver is also commonly seen now. There is also a genetic tri color pattern, which is expressed even if there is only orange and white color (you just can’t see it). It’s only visible when there is liver color expressed. Which is interesting because it is written in our standard as “acceptable but not preferred” - but since it is often there whether seen or not, many people believe the standard should be rewritten.
It will be interesting to see these puppies when they are older to see if they resemble either breed more closely. So far, they lack the obvious spitz characteristics except for the tail, and so far as I can see, have zero Brittany characteristics at all - and interestingly neither are patterned at all. Solid colors don’t occur in either breed, although Kees puppies might not show as much pattern. So maybe it will change.
That Color & Markings module on the AKC site can be a bit misleading. Although it lists Tawny & White - and will provide registration papers for those colors as well as several other “non-standard” colors - they are clearly undesirable according according to the official AKC parent club for Keeshonds. Those colors would be heavily penalized in the show ring, and no responsible breeder who believes in trying to keep the Keeshond true to its written standard would deliberately try to produce those colors or try to place puppies of those colors in a breeding home. That said, there are apparently people who do intentionally produce white and cream colored Keeshonds - including a woman in Tennessee, although her website states that she sells those puppies to only pet homes and with a spay/neuter contract (not sure though how well she polices the latter). I honestly don’t know why the breed club allows AKC to issue registration papers at all to dogs of non-standard colors as it does tempt greeders to breed “outside the norm.”
FWIW - here is what the official Keeshond AKC breed standard says (highlighting is mine).
And apologies to the OP for getting so far off topic. 
AKC papers are virtually meaningless now outside of show dogs, people are breeding for dilutes and off standard colors and merle on purpose because they’re popular and basically lying to get them registered. Labs, Frenchies, and Bulldogs are the hot ones for it at the moment.
Because it’s not AKCs job. They are simply a registry. If the parents are registered, the puppies can be registered.
I don’t think the papers are meaningless; they still show parentage, but a registered dog does not mean a quality dog, in any way. That’s why the idea of the DNA tests are silly. If someone breeds a wrong color intentionally, or a wrong head shape, or simply has the ugliest specimen of that breed and then it is crossed with another dog - what they look like may not indicate the original breeds at all.
Only if the parents the breeder is claiming are actually the parents. There’s a lot of shady pet breeder activity now.
Well, yes. Our breed requires DNA testing for entry into national events. It’s pretty standard for good breeders to DNA these days.
But I’m far less worried about sketchy parentage as just breeders who don’t conduct normal health screenings before breeding - like hip dysplasia.
My bad - I mistakenly thought the national breed club had some sway with AKC in that regard.
They aren’t meaningless for people who want a dog of a specific breed. It’s proof the dog is truly of THAT breed and isn’t some kind of mix.
As for those popular breeds you mentioned - someone would have to pay me (and big bucks) to take one of them. I am not a fan of "trendy’ breeds at all - or of trendy mixes like Poodle Doodles of any ilk.
And God help us - there are people now breeding Frenchie Doodles. Sorry - it looks like someone’s mutt got over the fence and mated with another mutt.
That’s exactly my point, there are a ton of “breeders” lying when they register their litters. And cashing in on the implied legitimacy “papers” provides.
Granted, there are greeders out there. They are basically scumbags who are in it only for the money, and I would wager not very many of them are doing DNA testing, or health testing for that matter. And who have absolutely ZERO interest in doing their part to help the breed maintain its best characteristics. No, their only concern is to line their pockets at the expense of the integrity of the breed.
Yep, and it makes me so sad. I should probably unfollow those groups on FB, that’s where I’ve been seeing a ton of it, I hadn’t known that there is such a high volume of these fancy pet “breeders” out there. Yesterday they shared pictures of bulldog puppies with such thick ‘ropes’ over their noses that they were literally OVER their noses. Like, it’s not bad enough that they’ve been bred for completely smashed faces, you have to cover their nostrils too? Sick. And a dilute color, to boot.
We have seen this (and/or heard this happening) in field litters of my breed. Brittanys with a dose of Setter or Pointer to create more competitive field trial dogs. (Disparagingly referred to as Settneys.)
Even though DNA exists, the rules have been written such that DNA is acceptable through AKC or American Field, which makes it easy to register alternating generations of dogs to make it really difficult to prove anything. This is an ongoing issue in many purebreed clubs, but different from the average “greeders” who are selling off color purebreds.
We were accused of this with our most accomplished Vizsla, due to a small amount of white on her chest. We didn’t breed her ourselves, but she’s got well known bloodlines. Here’s the extent of the white… 
But that’s allowable even in the show ring. Maybe not desirable, but certainly doesn’t mean the dog isn’t purebred.
These however…hmmmm.
I know, right?! We just dead panned the folks talking $H!# and walked away. Honestly though, it put such a yuck taste in our mouths that we make “no white” part of the conditions for a puppy now.
Holy mother of setter, your picture with the dog on the table. That’s despicable if they’re saying that’s a Brittany. The other one, I’m not versed in Brittany’s enough to say definitively - head/neck/coat look different. I’ve never met one that wasn’t a nice dog. Dog of the Year was a Brittany with more stamina than I’ve ever seen (and lacking a little handling, but my GOD the bird finding on that dog!!) - I got to see her in the regional mop the floor with her bracemate but then lose because she wouldn’t honor. gahhhh
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
