Why breed for coat color?

[JB]

“All else equal” just means you’ve settled on, say 2 stallions whose temperament, conformation, pedigree, etc, all meet the criteria for breeding to your mare, and you can choose to guarantee a “regular” color (most likely bay, maybe chestnut, small possibility of black), or you can guarantee a dilute color or spots.

Some people would not choose the double dilute or homozygous spotted stallion because they’d really rather not have a dilute or spotted horse, others WOULD choose that stallion because the dilute/spots are what they’d really rather have.

[quietann]

I think color is an added feature. Of course one wants to well-conformed, well-behaved, and talented horse. Color just adds a bit to the package.

Basic thing from the Morgan world is that a lot of today’s buyers are older adult ammies, and why should they NOT want color and a “pretty” horse?

In the Morgan show world, plain bays are the most common, followed by chestnuts and blacks (yes, true blacks.) Minimal white markings are/were the best. The “colorfuls” were around all the while, but often suspected of impurity by the big breeders. This was while a lot of those big breeders were secretly outcrossing to ASBs and Hackneys! Oddly enough, many colorfuls were in ranch herds, which were relatively closed and had breeders who absolutely did not want to cross in other breeds to get more action.

When colorfuls started getting popular – mostly outside the breed ring, and let’s say 25 years ago – there were a lot of really terrible quality ones. They are still around, but they have been crossed into more traditional lines and breeders are realizing that you need a quality horse under the pretty coat, and one can’t expect a high price only because the horse is colorful.

This is an example of a really good colorful Morgan stallion. He’s from very traditional show lines – lots of Waseeka and Upwey in there – with the color coming from the bottom line only. He was “ahead of his time” as a breed show horse, but still very successful. I’ve not met him in person, but he’s “just the ticket” for someone looking for a colorful “show horse.”

Now that the colorfuls are more common, they do seem to be showing up mostly in the Western divisions at the breed shows, almost as if the Old Tyme breeders are still thinking that color = stock horse. The above stallion was an exception, but as I said, he is really bred to to be a show horse.

I will say one thing, as an owner of a VERY pretty colorful mare, that I enjoy the attention she attracts. She’s not breeding quality due to conformation, but has the right attitude and athletic mindset. I did not set out to get a colorful Morgan and I didn’t buy her for her color; it grew on me. Her PPE vet noted a couple of small issues that in his opinion would probably not be a problem for what I wanted to do, but it turned out that they were.

My filly is one of those plain bays, and I have to admit, sometimes she suffers by comparison to the mare, just because she’s plain. She definitely has an easier nature and a better brain, and I’m not seeing much in the way of conformation flaws that would affect her ability to be a nice low-level riding horse. Should I have held out for a colorful? Maybe. But I didn’t plan to buy the filly.

[Equilibrium]

I’m with DarkBayUnicorn, another person who refuses to breed to grey stallions. Enough good ones in solid colors that I can choose to compliment my mares. Life is too short for all that extra work. And before you know it you’re either buying them a Lycra suit with Hood or PJ’s because I mean you got to do what you can. I’ve got enough crazy going on already.

Terri

[Dressagelvr]

It is called “black beauty syndrome” and it is sadly prevalent.

.As tough as the market is I think “most” people are well aware that quality has to come first, then color.

If this were true, then there would be more quality “color” stallions. Look at the color stallions, paint and cremello alike. You are hard pressed to find one with even a respectable competition record in the sport horse disciplines, never mind a world class one.

Look at their offspring, they don’t usually do much either. Part of that is because the stallion is average or worse quality and part of it is that mare owners who breed for color tend to own lower quality mares.

I can’t think of a single sport horse color stallion that would get so much as a second look if he were a plain bay. That says it all.

[JB]

Art Deco, Sempatico, Samber if he were still around? Kambarbay is a nice up and coming double dilute Akhal-Teke. Solaris Sporthorses has some nice stallions - maybe not Olympic caliber, but just like the plain bay packages they have to start somewhere. Umenno is Wellington x Samber, and his son Solaris Buenno brings in Ekstein through Edkin Hill, though sadly was injured young. I believe both of them sold and are not with Solaris anymore.

It takes time to bring color into the upper levels, especially since so many of the colored/dilute horses were bred for color only and quality was slim pickings.

And likewise, there are plenty of plain bay stallions out there who are intact solely because their paternal grandsire made a name for himself, but the sire didn’t, and the damline did nothing in the last 10 generations.

All bad breeding choices exist on both sides of the line

[khall]

Dressagelvr, I bred to a cremello Lusitano stallion not for international quality horse but for a horse for myself to ride and train. Been breeding my own riding horses and selling a few here and there since 1989. For me it is not about showing heavily and year end awards, it is about the journey of riding and training. My Luso X filly will be my first foray into the baroque horse world. Up to this point I have only bred WBs, well except for one Conn/TB colt I had and sold.

[DarkBayUnicorn]

[QUOTE=Equilibrium;8510651]
I’m with DarkBayUnicorn, another person who refuses to breed to grey stallions. Enough good ones in solid colors that I can choose to compliment my mares. Life is too short for all that extra work. And before you know it you’re either buying them a Lycra suit with Hood or PJ’s because I mean you got to do what you can. I’ve got enough crazy going on already.

Terri[/QUOTE]

Hallelujah! I’m not alone!

[Texarkana]

I’ve known quite a number of Art Deco horses, both solid and pinto, who were extremely good at their jobs as amateur horses. They may not have been Olympic caliber or winning on a national level, but they had long and successful careers packing their owners around recognized and unrecognized shows. I think he’s been a positive influence for sporthorses breeders, especially to those targeting the junior/amateur market.

Many people may say those performances are not “good enough,” and that those breeders should be breeding to “elite” sporthorses and not settling for amateur mounts… but amateurs make up the majority of horse buying market.

[Tiger_Paws]

[QUOTE=quietann;8510516]
I think color is an added feature. Of course one wants to well-conformed, well-behaved, and talented horse. Color just adds a bit to the package.

.[/QUOTE]

Of course everyone says that to be politically correct.

However there are many example of breeders, who say they are breeding for conformation, ability, ect and that color is “icing on the cake” But in fact they are basing their breeding decisions on color.

[JB]

Palladio (Caletto I x Samber) - hetero Tobiano, did very well in upper level Hunters, and he’s even been chosen as a sire by several MOs I know despite his color (they really, really dislike spots or even excessive chrome) in the hopes they’d get a solid LOL

[NoDQhere]

Very, very, very few horses of ANY color will ever make it to the “top of sport” and very, very , very few riders will ever ride at that level. So, IMHO, a breeder better be breeding horses capable of being a sound , sane, competitive partner. If that horse also sports a pretty color, chance are it will be “sellable”.

[Nootka]

You can add Blue Eyed Dream to the list and California Chablis. Unfortunately one is deceased (last year) and the other is gelded (but frozen available).

BED
https://vimeo.com/109529534
http://www.sporthorse-data.com/d?z=m78qBG&d=blue+eyed+dream&x=0&y=0

Chablis
http://www.sporthorse-data.com/d?z=m78qBG&d=california+chablis&x=0&y=0
http://fieldstonefarm.biz/services/breeding-services/

Chess M (sadly deceased too) also has get that are doing well. One has been awarded title of European Champion twice named Sol’ring Cadeau Noir.

[arlosmine]

Here is a link to a fascinating, fifty year old study on domestication. This was done with Russian foxes, not horses. The surprising (and completely NOT selected for) correlation between inherited temperament and a gene linked COLOR component is really interesting.
This could infer that the increase in white markings (pintos) could be linked to a temrememt characteristic of being more docile/domestic.
Temple Grandin has remarked on the increased white markings in horses being correlated to a relative greater genetic distance from wild stock. I can’t find the quote for that, though

For me however, color is the last thing I pay attention to when horse shopping, though I admit to succumbing to some generalities like associating chestnut mares with being potentially more sensitive…and I do have “favorite” colors. But, since it’s not a determining factor, I own two chestnuts (least favorite color) out of four equines. And only one “favorite”, a clear bay.

http://scienceblogs.com/thoughtfulanimal/2010/06/14/monday-pets-the-russian-fox-st/

[JB]

Except that we know spotting patterns in horses are spontaneous mutations, some of them quite old (like W20), some of them pretty new. At points in history, white markings were discriminated against (appies not withstanding), and it’s in more recent history that they have not only been more accepted, but more bred for, so it stands to reason that the increase marks more distance from wild stock.

With the foxes, while I don’t pretend to understand it all, it does seem perfectly plausible that the changes were due to, at the root of things, selecting for certain hormonal combinations, those that at their root produced the desired behaviors - more friendly towards people. Hormones can play a big role in hair coat (Cushing’s anyone?) and definitely temperament. It seems less likely that the temperament was linked to the coat color, than it does the temperament and coat color/texture are linked - in that species anyway - to the changes in hormonal characteristics.

In some species, it’s known that the movement between wild/feral behavior, and more “acceptable” domestic behavior can change very quickly. IIRC just a couple of generations of pigs can turn very feral in nature once out of the domestic environment - not just a lack of human contact, but actual feral characteristics, like increased or new tusk growth, iirc.

Horses don’t seem to do that. Coats of horses bred from generations of domestic stock aren’t any different from coats of horses whose pedigree has never been domesticated (or at least not in 100s of years, since there isn’t any truly wild species of horse). Differences are much more related to breed origins - desert vs Siberia LOL

Maybe there’s a difference in how this works between prey and predator animals? I don’t have a clue on that.

[crosscreeksh]

[QUOTE=beowulf;8506216]
the first thing you notice about anything, i think, is the color. your eyes are instinctively drawn to specific colors and patterns - thanks to a millennia of hunting prey and gathering.

and so, it is a driving force in sales, marketing, advertising. it perpetuates every market, from toothbrushes to guinea pigs. patterns are important - they are pretty - they are unique and memorable.

so long as the other homework was done (quality product) what’s the shame in having a pretty thing?

~ signed,
an unrepentant plain bay lover[/QUOTE]

AMEN!! There are very few REPUTABLE breeders who choose color as the first ingredient!! First you start with a good horse…conformation, movement, talent, BRAINS…then hope to add “curb appeal” (The first thing a buyer sees!) with pretty colors and/or chrome or spots. It makes me CRAZY when some people comment that anyone “breeds for color”!!

[skydy]

[QUOTE=crosscreeksh;8512523]
AMEN!! There are very few REPUTABLE breeders who choose color as the first ingredient!! First you start with a good horse…conformation, movement, talent, BRAINS…then hope to add “curb appeal” (The first thing a buyer sees!) with pretty colors and/or chrome or spots. It makes me CRAZY when some people comment that anyone “breeds for color”!![/QUOTE]

I suppose it depends on your definition of a what a reputable breeder is… If you think there are only “a few reputable breeders” who would put color ahead of other requirements, then I disagree with your definition of reputable…I think there are NO “reputable breeders” who consider color as the first “ingredient”.

It may make you “crazy” but there are people who breed for color and thus there will be people who comment about the practice.

There’s nothing wrong with being smitten by a lovely coat color and everyone has their preference. There is however, a whole lot of inferior stock being bred in the U.S. and not just by color breeders.

Experienced people who want to purchase a horse for sport, can see past color and look to conformation, so if they want a certain color coat, they can consider the whole package. Newbies? not so much, and that is where the market lies for the breeder that is color (not conformation) focused.

There are some beautifully bred sport horses/ponies that are colorful and very well put together. Those animals, are the product of performance tested breeding stock and are priced accordingly.
There are relatively few quality pinto type sport horse lines established in the U.S. The same few sire lines are mentioned here whenever the subject arises.

Anyway, the people who are “making you crazy” by saying that anyone breeds for color, may just have noticed the dearth of well conformed and sound, colored sport horses in the U.S. and, the prevalence of paint and pinto stallions (sans performance records, or good conformation) to be had for cheap. Their resulting offspring are all over craigslist and local markets.

Of course, there are reputable people who specialize in the breeding of horses of a certain color.
There seem to be many more however, that are breeding inferior animals and selling them to inexperienced folks that are enamored by the color and really don’t understand the importance of conformation as it relates to soundness.

A herd of poorly conformed pinto horses is a very common sight around here, unfortunately.

[D_BaldStockings]

At one time I did breed to a pinto stallion - that other long-time breeders in my breed commented he was ‘stallion quality based on conformation, performance and pedigree, despite being pinto’. The pinto line traced through one’thread’ in the pedigree and had been bred to top sires (not their sons) for 3 generations and a top performance mare crossed to ‘color’ further back.

He was not homozygous (my choice) and I got a string of ‘solid’ foals of excellent quality (but not as valuable in the marketplace as the pinto would have been).

I had 2 full brothers out of one mare: the solid was easy on the eyes and a very quick learner, but hotter.

The pinto, alas, received the talented movement of his granddam I had been hoping to recover for over a decade, and several generations. To my eyes he was not as smooth and ‘wow’ in conformation, and would have been a better sale with the color. But there was no way I was going to sell that movement and his temperament was easier: I, with my ‘bay, no leg-white line’ owned a pinto and resigned myself to learning to keep white reasonably white.

Never regretted that choice.

There are plenty of less than average horses out there of all colors: there is no way I will discount a horse because of the ‘odd’ color if the ancestry and performance is there.

[EKLay]

[QUOTE=skydy;8513757]

A herd of poorly conformed pinto horses is a very common sight around here, unfortunately.[/QUOTE]

This could be said about pretty much anything though. Locally, I can go see a herd of poorly conformed fill in the blank very easily. Pinto, solid, mini, pony, and draft… Crappy breeders are crappy breeders regardless of whether they’re breeding based on color, “cute”, hair, or a popular horse that is 20 generations back in the pedigree. People breeding for just color are not the only ones flooding the market with horses that should never have been bred.

[Nootka]

[QUOTE=EKLay;8513809]
This could be said about pretty much anything though. Locally, I can go see a herd of poorly conformed fill in the blank very easily. Pinto, solid, mini, pony, and draft… Crappy breeders are crappy breeders regardless of whether they’re breeding based on color, “cute”, hair, or a popular horse that is 20 generations back in the pedigree. People breeding for just color are not the only ones flooding the market with horses that should never have been bred.[/QUOTE]

Very very true!

[SmartAlex]

There are plenty of reputable breeders breeding great horses of color, but they didn’t all wait for it to crop out in excellent bloodlines. Sometimes common horses of very unique colors were used because of their color and once the color was introduced, the breeding improved. I think that still happens. But I don’t think that breeders should have to live with that inferior stock color prejudice forever.