UKC Forums (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/index.php)
- Plotts (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/forumdisplay.php?forumid=50)
-- Buskin Plotts? (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/showthread.php?threadid=928349312)

A friend of mine owns this 8 month old Buckskin pup. He treed his first squirrel at 6 months old. He's going to switch him over to coons real soon.

I would like to find a pup or young buckskin male to mess with! If anybody knows of any please let me know!!!

__________________
Scott O. Rosson
River Bluff Plott Hounds
Let your dogs do your talking for you!!!!

Original Home Of:
W Ch Gr F Ch Nt Ch Gr Ch River Bluff Brindle Cowboy Up (08 APA Coondog of Year/NPHA Hall of Fame)

Gone but not forgotten!
Nt Ch River Bluff Brindle Tiger
Gr Nt Ch River Bluff Coon Crazy Toad
Gr Ch River Bluff Grindstone Heater
Nt Ch Rancho Ruff
Nt Ch Gr Ch Simmon's IN Daybreak Gotcha

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

Here's an excerpt from an article Dale Brandenburger wrote regarding buckskin Plotts, but you can read the full article here http://ohiohogdoggers.webs.com/apps...e-brandenburger

"BUCKSKINS
(Events that led up to the population explosion of the buckskin dogs and their abolishment from the breed.)
Three items are to be considered. Item number one: The old time Plott stock carried the buckskin gene but remember John Plottˇ¦s statement that they were very rare and the many so-called red buckskins appearing did not indicate good Plott breeding. True buckskins were a light yellow and buff colored dog. The red buckskins that appeared came from the Blevins hi-tan cross and the infusion of Redbone blood.
Item number two: The introduction of the Blevins strain into the breed, which carried the Hi-Tan gene, a relatively few short years before they were registered. No doubt this cross added to the Plott breed but I'm sure little did Mr. Ferguson, who never used the buckskins in his breeding program, realize what an impact this color phase would have on the breed at a later date as the third and fourth generations of these dogs were line bred together.
Item number three: Infusion of Redbone blood into the breed shortly after registration. During the summer of 1945, Alva Stegenga of Michigan contacted UKC in regards to registering the Plotts. Later, Mr. L.M. Patton of Iowa and Leonard Moffet of Illinois contacted UKC. Stud files were officially opened on February 12, 1946. When the Plott standard was drawn up it was considered not to register the buckskin. After much discussion and since there were so few Plotts in existence it was decided to include the buckskin color. Almost any breed of dogs ever registered had more foundation stock than what the Plott breed had. The names and numbers of the original eighty-one registered dogs is published in the 1970 (NPHA) yearbook. To my knowledge there was not a buckskin in the bunch.
As the buckskins were being born, instead of breeding them to a good brindle dog, breeders would drive hundreds of miles to breed to another buckskin because they liked the color, strictly a color-breeding program that was never practiced by the old time Plott breeders. Not realizing what they were doing, these color-breeders were inbreeding buckskins in a big way. Without knowing what they were doing they were unaware that their dogs were reverting back to the Hi-Tan strain of dogs that did not look like, or act like a Plott. To further add to the problem, it appeared that the infusion of Redbone blood was taking place. When a Redbone is crossed with a Plott, the first generation is mostly brindle and the temptations for monetary gain were too great. Buckskin dogs were not supposed to be red. The results were creating one big problem. Litters were coming 100% buckskins or saddle back buckskins. Most of them were more red than buckskin, unprecedented in the history of the breed. Plott breeders who were knowledgeable and aware of what was happening to the breed started discussing what to do to solve the problem.
A petition was circulated by the National Plott Hound Association (NPHA) to abolish the buckskin from the breed, as the damage being done far outweighed the good a few buckskins could do. I can assure you that most of the breeders hated to see the buckskin go but most agreed that if was narrowed down to the lesser of two evils as something had to be done. The vast majority of petitions were returned with more than 95% in favor of stopping registration of the buckskin. A committee was appointed by NPHA. Clyde Burnett, Joe Lucas, Jack Frey, and myself were to present this petition to UKC. Dr. Fuhrman agreed that a serious, bad problem, which was playing havoc with the breed, had arisen and it was time to standardize. He also pointed out that the only reason they were first recognized was because of the shortage of dogs in the breed. They were no longer needed, and he further pointed out that the color gene has nothing to do with ability. To continue was leaving the door open for more outside blood. UKC and the knowledgeable breeders knew that every time outside blood was added it was diluting the old time Plott bear dog stock and it was changing the very characteristics that separated the Plott from other breeds. For that very reason the vote to open single registration is soundly defeated every time the issue comes up. Even those who wanted to preserve the buckskins agree that we cannot let this happen. Most know that those who want the files open are seeking monetary gains or they have some brindle dog that has been culled out of the breed. There is no new, pure Plott stock to add and the majority agrees we don't want to dilute what we have.
Dr. Fuhrman pointed out that by running a cross section of his files that most of these so-called red buckskins could be traced back to one kennel indicating that Redbone blood had entered the picture. NPHA was affiliated with the National Coonhound Association (NCA) and was not a UKC-chartered club until 1958. Dr. Fuhrman said he owed it to all Plott breeders to run a survey in the magazines. When the votes were counted, again a large majority ruled that the buckskin should be abolished from the breed. Had these buckskins been bred to brindle dogs, the bad situation could have been avoided but the problem created by the buckskin lovers themselves, along with the injection of outside blood led to their rejection in 1958.
Several times since, a minority group again brought the issue to a vote. It was again and again rejected. At the 1980 meeting the question was asked, "How many more times will we have to vote on this issue?" The majority present expressed their feelings that they were tired of the issue coming up. It was decided to rule it a dead issue, settled once and for all and not to be voted upon again. Too many voting on the issue were voting on monetary and emotional feelings, that they had a so-called buckskin that they could not register and were quick to point out that there was always buckskins in the breed. Very few if any had any knowledge of the fact that the very existence of the old time Plott stock was in jeopardy of being completely changed and destroyed. Others had never been out of their backyards to see and witness the havoc being bestowed upon our beloved Plott Hound. Anyone knowledgeable of the breed since its registration knows for a fact that the breed had made tremendous strides forward in ability, conformation, and color. If anyone's strain has deteriorated put the blame where it belongs, on the fact that untrained dogs were bred and not on the fact a certain color was or was not registered."

__________________
CH 'PR' Thunderstruck Russian Gold [ENG] "Chunk"
||AKC CCH ACHA GRNITECH CH UKC GRNITECH GRCH 'PR' Taylor's Rasputin x AKC CSG UKC CCH GRCH 'PR' Allen's Little Gold Magic - co-owned by Lesa Watson & Caleb Tolley||
-2015 NC State Championship BMOB
-2015 English Days Puppy Class Winner Thurs. & Fri.
-2015 UKC Shriner's Hospital Benefit BMOS
CH 'PR' Taylor Made Thundering Magic [ENG] "Molly"
||BIMBS RBIMBS CCH CH 'PR' Whiterock Mountain Red Ruger x GRCH 'PR' Hill's Little Dolly - co-owned with Lesa Watson||
-2015 TN Youth State Championship BFOB
-2015 UKC RQE BFOS
'PR' Thunderstruck "Grace" O'Malley [ENG]
||GRNITECH GRCH 'PR' Spanky's Hillbilly Stinger x CH 'PR' Thompson's Hillbilly Carrie||
CH 'PR' Thunderstruck "Jewel" Weed [Plott]
||Bias Bred||
'PR' Thunderstruck Rittercruz "Ivy" & 'PR' Thunderstruck Fistful Of Dollars "Joe" [Plott littermates]
||AKC CGCH GCH CH UKC GRCH CCH 'PR' C-Cruz Mob Boss Vito's Gotcha x AKC CH UKC CCH GRCH 'PR' County Line Eleanor||
GRCH Thunderstruck Silver "Nugget" [ALH]
||GRNITECH GRCH Stampede's Camo Dazzle x GRCH By Faith Blessed Assurance||
-2015 Grand American BMOB
-2015 Winter Classic Senior Class Winner
-2015 Winter Classic Overall High Scoring ALH Male
-2015 SETWD BMOB, Fri. & Sat.
-2015 Macon Co. CHA Benefit BMOS, Sat.
-2015 Peach Classic CH Male, Fri. & Sat.
-2015 Peach Classic Overall High Scoring ALH
-2015 Plott Sectional CH Male
-2015 UKC RQE CH Male
-2015 English Days Overall High Scoring ALH
-2015 PlottFest CH Male
-2015 WNC Houndsmen GRCH Male
-2015 Shriner's Hospital Benefit GRCH Male
Thunderstruck A Holy Terror [ALH] "Cas"
||GRCH GRNITECH By Faith Coat Of Many Colors HTX x CH Striker's Bawlin' Blitz||
Thunderstruck H&A's Indigo Skies [ALH] "Sky"
||WSHOWCH CCH GRCH Elburn's Indigo x R&A's Lilly Of The Valley - Co-owned with Adena Fussnecker||
'PR' Thunderstruck Super "Fly" [ALH]
||Gurley Creek Buddy x Gurley Creek Half Stack Susie||

Mr. Creasman, Thank you very much for putting that together. It was very interesting and informative. To be exact, that was about has good and informative recollection of what happened as I've ever read. Once Again, Thanks! But, it's my opinion that this issue unfortunately WILL NEVER be dead has long has performance is overridden by a certain color or pattern preferred by a small segment (the NPHA) of all who care for this great Breed.

I ain't writing this to restart the controversy though. I just want to point out what is recorded by the UKC on all this. And hopefully fill in those parts that might of been forgotten so those of the Breed, that truly do care about this, will know about all of it.

I have the 1958 survey the UKC took. I'll post it if any really wish to read it. What Mr. Creasman wrote is far better written and interesting though. One of thing I think some may want to also know is the fact that the survey was published right before the Holidays, and the survey had to be returned By the 1st of the year. Because of that, only 143 responded. Dr, Fuhrman wrote several paragraphs on all that at the first of it.

There were 10 questions on that survey. Here's the vote on the one's topic related;

QUESTION No. 2: I am in favor of U.K.C. accepting buckskin color. 78 votes were cast not to accept the buck_skin color. 33 votes were cast to accept the buckskin color. There were a total of 111 votes cast. There were 32 not voting or answering to No. 2 question in regard to buck_skin color.

QUESTION No. 3: I am in favor of U.K.C. accepting maltese color. 100 no votes were cast against maltese color. 24 yes votes were cast to accept maltese color. There was a total of 124 votes. There were 19 not voting or answering question No. 3.

QUESTION No. 4: I am in favor of U.K.C. accepting red color. There was a total of 83 no votes against the red color. There were 14 yes votes for red color. There was a total of 97 votes cast for the fourth question. There were 46 not answering or voting on No. 4 question.

QUESTION No. 5: I am in favor of U.K.C. accepting other colors or combinations of colors. 85 votes were cast for no other colors to be allowed. 22 yes votes were cast for other colors to be allowed. A total of 107 votes were cast for No. 5 question. 36 not answering or voting for No. 5 question.

There is another very important part to what was intend by all this that those that care should also know. One of the closing paragraphs state's this;

Starting with the 15th day of May, 1958, U.K.C. Registration Office will accept only the brindle colored puppies and brindle with black saddle for registration. We ask that the breeders cooperate with U.K.C. Registration Office and not apply on litter application for registration of puppies that are any other color than the above two colors.

I sincerely hope all read what the patterns of the Breed were said to be established with all this; brindle or saddleback.

Hope all read what colors were allowed: Only brown and black colored dogs would be allowed. The Standards were not changed by all this. The Original Standards remained until 1978.

The UKC records shows that in 1978 a survey was passed out at Plott Days. No vote count is shown. There ain't much to it, but I'll post it if any wish. What that survey changed was the Standards were changed to dis-allow the solid pattern. All colors were allowed. The semi-erectal ears were removed, and the primary patterns that our Breed was intended to be was changed from brindle and saddleback to brindle and black solid with trim.

Hope all that helps those that care with all this.