There are reasons why those other quantum charges, like those from the weak and strong force are not able to be hair in a BH. Once inside the horizon BHs that had collapsed with nuclear (strong, weak, or semi strong like nuclear from mesons etc) what those particles were, and their forces, will disappear as information (but see about quantum and soft hair below)
See, for the No Hair results for the strong force, for instance,
http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.28.452
There's other papers on it.
Classically, in Einstein-Maxwell BHs, nothing else can have hair, under certain restrictions (see the Living Reviews below). It has to do whether
the quantity conserved came from a massless local gauge symmetry -- true for mass and charge. If so, then those quantities will be, must be conserved, in an asymptotically flat spacetime. Other entities, such as the dipole moment, or quadrupole moment and so on will either remain as hair, or be radiated to infinity. For electric or magnetic dipole, and higher level electromagnetic multipoles, they can be radiated so do not remain as hair. For gravitational dipoles, they cannot as the lowest multipole that can be gravitationally radiated is quadrupole. Thus, mass angular momentum is one of the hairs of the BH.
The results are that conserved charges or currents of classical or semi-classical fields can only remain as BH hair if they arise from massless gauge fields. Electromagnetism and gravity are spin 1 and 2 gauge fields with zero mass. Flavor and color in weak and strong forces are MASSIVE gauge fields. See some rationale below besides the paper above and the two, Living Reviews and the 1992 Caltech review, below.
One way the no hair theorem sometimes has been stated is that anything that can be radiated will be radiated (I can't immediately find the reference, but multiple papers used the math for it to show similar results). Strong and weak forces do not have quantities that can be radiated to infinity, they're short range (from massive gauge fields) and won't get there. Similarly the symmetry (or approx symmetry) for baryon number or lepton number conservation does not give the BH hair such as baryon number of lepton number. Thus, particle number is not hair, and not 'conserved' in standard General Relativity
See below about soft hair and the Conservation Of information. At this point there is no accepted solution as to how quantum information (such as particle number) could be conserved through the horizon, this remains as the information paradox.
Similarly to electric charge, it is also known that if there are magnetic charges they can also be conserved hair on a BH.
BTW, hair just means you can characterize the BH that way, and it won't change if you leave it alone. But if you interact with it, it can loose charge, angular momentum and mass, and thus energy. That can happen for instance with the Penrose effect, but it requires an external particle(s) or interaction, such as a particle approaching the Kerr horizon and getting into the ergosphere (the particle can emerge with more angular momentum, charge and energy, extracted from the BH, with a conceptual virtiual particles with negative values goes into the horizon). What does get conserved or increases is the entropy. See for instance https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penrose_process. It is a way to extract energy from BHs, and it's basically an accepted result, though not yet actually seen.
Now, it is also known that it is possible to have hair from non-classical quantum fileds such as a Yang Mills field, a dilation field, and an axion field. The No Hair theorem gets expanded with some quantum hair being possible. See, for instance,
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2012-7/
http://www.theory.caltech.edu/~preskill/pubs/preskill-1992-quantum-hair.pdf
There is other recent work, by Hawking, Perry and Strominger that BHs have soft hair, and that it may represent the other information that has gone into the BH horizon. Somewhat speculative. That has nothing to do with the weak or strong force, rather with the conformal symmetries at infinity. It's a tentative result they published in early 2016 in arXiv and then in a refereed journal in June. But it is researchers results, others started looking at the issue to see if it makes sense, and if the results, which were simplistic and not fully quantum, hold more generally. See https://phys.org/news/2016-06-hawking-team-soft-hair-theory.html
ADDED REFERENCES AND SUMMARIES FROM PAPERS, ON QUANTUM BLACK HOLE HAIR, SEMI-CLASSICAL HAIR FOR SOLITONS, ON MICROSCOPIC BLACK HOLES (WHICH WILL NEED A QUANTUM GRAVITY THEORY, OR SOME ASSUMPTIONS OF IT)
A paper that claims an Einstein_Yang Mill –Higgs black hole. In a chinese journal, I cant read the paper, the abstract is below.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/241264894_Static_and_stationary_black_holes_with_QCD_hairs
‘The coupled SU(5) Einstein-Yang-Mills-Higgs system of fields is investigated. A family of static spherically symmetric and stationary axisymmetric black hole solutions is obtained. The result shows that the black hole can carry not only the Abelian electric and magnetic charges but also the non-Abelian SU(3)c color charge’
The skyrmion BH, basically a semi-classical BH that has what the author claims is an equivalent to the baryon number. The source is a soliton with a horizon inside the soliton. Part of the abstract is below
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0550321316303194
‘We show that the existence of black holes with classical skyrmion hair invalidates standard proofs that global charges, such as the baryon number, cannot be conserved by a black hole. By carefully analyzing the standard arguments based on a Gedankenexperiment in which a black hole is seemingly-unable to return the baryon number that it swallowed, we identify inconsistencies in this reasoning, which does not take into the account neither the existence of skyrmion black holes nor the baryon/skyrmion correspondence.’
From the Coleman and Preskill paper from 1992, in the reference above:
The microscopic problems concern the structure of very small
‘In fact the quantum mechanics of black holes presents two sets of problems, with different characters. They might be called the microscopic and the macroscopic problems. The microscopic problems concern the structure of very small black holes, with mass of order the Planck mass. It is difficult, for several reasons, to imagine that the description of such holes (if they exist) would not require a fully developed theory of quantum gravity.
The first and simplest reason is that as the mass of a black hole approaches the Planck mass, its Schwarzschild radius 2GM approaches its Compton radius h/M. Thus, irreducible quantum fluctuations in position, which are of order of the Compton radius, render the classical concept of the horizon — or indeed the classical concept of the gravitational field near the nominal location of the hole —problematic.’
See a collection of paper on the hairy black holes (meaning beyond the No hair Theorem) in the literature at
http://iopscience.iop.org/journal/0264-9381/page/Focus_issue_on_hairy_black_holes;jsessionid=0C746614346B93500837A3731A1090DD.c1.iopscience.cld.iop.org
The first reference is to rotating black holes in asymptotic spacetimes, with non-Abelian gauge fields. It is at http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0264-9381/33/23/234002
The abstract says:
‘We here review asymptotically flat rotating black holes in the presence of non-Abelian gauge fields. Like their static counterparts these black holes are no longer uniquely determined by their global charges. In the case of pure SU(2) Yang–Mills fields, the rotation generically induces an electric charge, while the black holes do not carry a magnetic charge. When a Higgs field is coupled, rotating black holes with monopole hair arise in the case of a Higgs triplet, while in the presence of a complex Higgs doublet the black holes carry sphaleron hair. The inclusion of a dilaton allows for Smarr type mass formulae.’
