What Is A Purebred?

[Salukifan]

You have a very valid point but I am afraid I just cant see ANKC accepting methods to suit all breeders goals anytime soon. I know reg checks on all breeders would be too much but random checks & following through & checking up on breeders other members & the general public alert you to having certian issues would be a very good place to start.

I really belief there needs to be a registry thats pedigrees are acceptable to other mainstream registries that are willing to look after those wanting to breed more for health, function, work ability/ethic above type & coat colour, that believe it is possible to introduce new blood to bottle necked breeds if done correctly, that dosn't have a problem with re establishing near lost breeds or unregconised breeds. If the ANKC could see it within themselves to work alongside a registry like this so health results, pedgrees & information can be freely shared i think it would be a huge step forward.

But I can not see that happening whilst ever we are still hearing the old well they shouldnt breed if they dont show line being trotted out, should be they shouldnt breed if not willing to take the respondaability of that pups housing & welfare for it's life instead.

Why is this relevent to the question asked because so many said the only purebreed is a dog with reg from ANKC & to me that show the very point i am trying to make here, some people know more about what they have been told than the actuakl truth.

Pretty much everything you want is possible with the ANKC, if MEMBERS push for it. They can do so through the breed clubs or the state canine controls. The ANKC doesn't receive submissions directly.

The precedent for opening breed registries for outcrossing is well established if the need to do so is demonstrated. Working gundog breeders register their dogs with the ANKC even though they don't often show them - but they do compete with them in ANKC sanctioned performance trials. You can register for ANKC performance events with a dog recognised through other registries - the ISDS and the WKC are cases in point.

I have no idea where you have gotten the idea that "if you don't show you shouldn't breed" is the motto of the ANKC. It simply isn't the case. However if you don't show and all you do is breed the dogs you own and you never test them against any external set of criteria, then that's hardly in the interest of breed bloodlines either IMO.

[eyeopener]

This isn't a thread really about the quality of papered pedigree dogs, but I do agree with the above about breeding for the show ring.

I think alot of the responsibility lies in the hands of our judges. Judges really have the power to shape how pedigree dogs are bred. The way I see it, what get's put up in the show ring is what style becomes popular. Then the show fraternity breed to try and match what the majority of judge's are putting up, and what is winning. This then trickles down to public expectations of the dog they are buying to match what is in the show ring.

I know, most of the time the breeder's are the ones who are blamed for these shifts in what is expected in a breed. And they are. They could buck the trend and breed to closer to the origanal standards, not what is winning in the show ring. But, standards as we all know, are subject to interpretation, and the judge's are meant to be the ones trained to interpret that standard, and give expert assessment on which dogs are the best versions of the breed standard. Really, they are there to interpret what dogs fit to the standard the best, and if they put up dogs that are not to standard, they are encouraging whatever that trend is.

I agree the judges do have some respondsability but it not all up to them, although it dose bug me no end to see over the top types put up time & time again in many breeds. But a big part is breeders breeding what they know will sell & the public are demanding different n bigger than big or smaller than small. But you know what if they where not given the choise they would just have to stick with a good individual example of the breed or go get a mutt. I also hate hearing over & over again what a good strong litter with all looking so similar, too me thats just a sign of narrowing gene pools. We should just realise that yes there is differing types within a breed & not every individual dog will fit breed height or weight just so either & embrace the dogs individuality. But no we wont cookie cutter litters & everyone to be show ring perfect etc etc....

Yep I know by now you are all thinking where did this nutter come from...

[Salukifan]

I agree the judges do have some respondsability but it not all up to them, although it dose bug me no end to see over the top types put up time & time again in many breeds. But a big part is breeders breeding what they know will sell & the public are demanding different n bigger than big or smaller than small. But you know what if they where not given the choise they would just have to stick with a good individual example of the breed or go get a mutt. I also hate hearing over & over again what a good strong litter with all looking so similar, too me thats just a sign of narrowing gene pools. We should just realise that yes there is differing types within a breed & not every individual dog will fit breed height or weight just so either & embrace the dogs individuality. But no we wont cookie cutter litters & everyone to be show ring perfect etc etc....

Yep I know by now you are all thinking where did this nutter come from...

What breeds? It's hardly all of them.

The ANKC is largely not responsible for many of the extremes of big and small out there. It's the profit breeders that are. I can say that with complete confidence becasue many of the huge and teacup dogs simply don't conform to ANKC breed standards.

I'll concede that there's some colour breeding occuring in some breeds but I'd argue that much of that market is being met by unregistered breeders also. Of course folk know pups will vary in type - but that's why there's a breed standard to keep people on track.

I can't name a single ANKC breeder I know who lets the fashion of the pet market dictate their breeding decisions. Most don't give a toss about what the public wants this month - they can sell the pups they breed without any problem whatsovever.

These may be popular perceptions but they simply don't stand up to any kind of scruitiny. Maybe you need to come back into the fold to realise the situation isn't as bleak as you imagine it to be.

Edited September 6, 2012 by Haredown Whippets

[eyeopener]

You have a very valid point but I am afraid I just cant see ANKC accepting methods to suit all breeders goals anytime soon. I know reg checks on all breeders would be too much but random checks & following through & checking up on breeders other members & the general public alert you to having certian issues would be a very good place to start.

I really belief there needs to be a registry thats pedigrees are acceptable to other mainstream registries that are willing to look after those wanting to breed more for health, function, work ability/ethic above type & coat colour, that believe it is possible to introduce new blood to bottle necked breeds if done correctly, that dosn't have a problem with re establishing near lost breeds or unregconised breeds. If the ANKC could see it within themselves to work alongside a registry like this so health results, pedgrees & information can be freely shared i think it would be a huge step forward.

But I can not see that happening whilst ever we are still hearing the old well they shouldnt breed if they dont show line being trotted out, should be they shouldnt breed if not willing to take the respondaability of that pups housing & welfare for it's life instead.

Why is this relevent to the question asked because so many said the only purebreed is a dog with reg from ANKC & to me that show the very point i am trying to make here, some people know more about what they have been told than the actuakl truth.

Pretty much everything you want is possible with the ANKC, if MEMBERS push for it. They can do so through the breed clubs or the state canine controls. The ANKC doesn't receive submissions directly.

The precedent for opening breed registries for outcrossing is well established if the need to do so is demonstrated. Working gundog breeders register their dogs with the ANKC even though they don't often show them - but they do compete with them in ANKC sanctioned performance trials. You can register for ANKC performance events with a dog recognised through other registries - the ISDS and the WKC are cases in point.

I have no idea where you have gotten the idea that "if you don't show you shouldn't breed" is the motto of the ANKC. It simply isn't the case. However if you don't show and all you do is breed the dogs you own and you never test them against any external set of criteria, then that's hardly in the interest of breed bloodlines either IMO.

I dont mind putting my dogs against other breeders examples of the breed but I dont think the show ring is teh place for it & would prefer a more work based approach or just a general metting area to share ideas & check out each others dogs & talk about recent working/sporting achievements may do just as well. Imho the show ring puts too much on looks & the dogs presentation without taking function, correct function for a breeds origanal purpose, health or working ability, temperment or ethic into account at all. Seems abit of a wasted win to me sorry.

I will be first to rejoin when I see the changes are even likely & would help in any way possible but I will not rejoin until then as I am too old n cranky these days.

[Salukifan]

I dont mind putting my dogs against other breeders examples of the breed but I dont think the show ring is teh place for it & would prefer a more work based approach or just a general metting area to share ideas & check out each others dogs & talk about recent working/sporting achievements may do just as well. Imho the show ring puts too much on looks & the dogs presentation without taking function, correct function for a breeds origanal purpose, health or working ability, temperment or ethic into account at all. Seems abit of a wasted win to me sorry.

I will be first to rejoin when I see the changes are even likely & would help in any way possible but I will not rejoin until then as I am too old n cranky these days.

Given that how a dog "looks" may significantly influence its ability to work, you can't ignore that. Everything from the tip of my breed (Whippets) nose to the end of its tail is influenced by the function the dog was meant to perform and those looks matter. Once you understand that every word of the standard is informed by function, then that standard becomes the bible for the breed.

What breed have you got? You're not going to see live coursing open up as a method for people to test the working ability of our sighthounds and lure coursing and flat racing don't provide an effective subsitute.

I get all you're talking about at my breed's speciality shows - and more. I talk to my Whippet and other sighthound friends all the time. None of this may not be as good as coursing my dogs on hares but its the least worst method we've got within the law.

Edited September 6, 2012 by Haredown Whippets

[Steve]

I have met some ANKC breeders who allow the pet market to dictate their breeding decisions but Ive never met an ANKC breeder who shows their dogs do that. Its about the goals again. One is breeding for pets and what appeals to them and those buying them, the other is breeding for a win in the ring and what appeals to a judge.

[eyeopener]

I did say old n cranky, lol...

I do agree function & how a dog look do go hand in hand & I it's not all breeds but some have lost the functional type & thats what gets me the most I guess. I think you misunderstand my problem with colour i dont believe dogs should be penalised for a colour thats known to be a breed colour just because its seen as not disirable. But I do also not like any breeding based on any trait alone as it's another fast way to further narrowing gene pools 7 other more important traits will be lost.

I know a few show breeders who deff breed to suit teh market on several levels whether it be the most saleable colours, coat tpes or type etc. just with any group you get you bad with your good. I do know several show breeders who I would say are the very top of my idea on doing the best possible to achieve thier goals whilst really doing anything of any use for the breed it's self. I just dont see things as black n white as i once did.

[Salukifan]

I did say old n cranky, lol...

I do agree function & how a dog look do go hand in hand & I it's not all breeds but some have lost the functional type & thats what gets me the most I guess. I think you misunderstand my problem with colour i dont believe dogs should be penalised for a colour thats known to be a breed colour just because its seen as not disirable. But I do also not like any breeding based on any trait alone as it's another fast way to further narrowing gene pools 7 other more important traits will be lost.

I know a few show breeders who deff breed to suit teh market on several levels whether it be the most saleable colours, coat tpes or type etc. just with any group you get you bad with your good. I do know several show breeders who I would say are the very top of my idea on doing the best possible to achieve thier goals whilst really doing anything of any use for the breed it's self. I just dont see things as black n white as i once did.

It ain't black and white - nothing is.

I just think that fixing the "system" we have now has better prospects than reinventing it and dividing the Fancy.