What Is A Purebred?

[dogsaremyworld]

This is a quote from the Dogs NSW homepage of thier website.

Dogs NSW: Promoting responsible dog ownership

We are an association which promotes the welfare of purebred dogs and responsible breeding. Come to us to learn about purchasing and caring for dogs; how to become a responsible breeder; or to get involved in a fun canine sport like agility, herding, obedience, retrieving and more.

Note how it says 'purebred' dogs and not pedigree or pedigree purebred dogs. Simply purebred. Now I am pretty sure that they are not looking to promote dogs whose ancestory cannot be proved, or dogs sold outside of the register (ie in the case of a breeder selling pups without a prefix).

[dancinbcs]

This is a quote from the Dogs NSW homepage of thier website.

Dogs NSW: Promoting responsible dog ownership

We are an association which promotes the welfare of purebred dogs and responsible breeding. Come to us to learn about purchasing and caring for dogs; how to become a responsible breeder; or to get involved in a fun canine sport like agility, herding, obedience, retrieving and more.

Note how it says 'purebred' dogs and not pedigree or pedigree purebred dogs. Simply purebred. Now I am pretty sure that they are not looking to promote dogs whose ancestory cannot be proved, or dogs sold outside of the register (ie in the case of a breeder selling pups without a prefix).

Yes, in registered dog circles they are referred to simply as "purebred" dogs, meaning "registered purebred".

[Rebanne]

A 'purebred' that is bought from a pound or a rescue organisation is purebred because it is obvious that it's antecendants were all of the same breed, and it looks exactly like that breed,

no it isn't. Steve has previously posted a photo of a beagle crossed with something else that to all intents and purposes looked loke a beagle. There were two? photo's posted, one was a pure beagle, one was not. And it was nigh impossible to tell the difference.

[sandgrubber]

One person's purebred is another person's mutt.

If we want to look at the really fine points, we could ask whether pure bred and purebreed and the same thing.:)

[LizT]

A 'purebred' that is bought from a pound or a rescue organisation is purebred because it is obvious that it's antecendants were all of the same breed, and it looks exactly like that breed,

no it isn't. Steve has previously posted a photo of a beagle crossed with something else that to all intents and purposes looked loke a beagle. There were two? photo's posted, one was a pure beagle, one was not. And it was nigh impossible to tell the difference.

Yes, at a Puppy School I once attended there was a Cavalier/Pug X Pug...it looked like a little black Pug, yet it was 1/4 Cavalier King Charles Spaniel.

[Florise]

Isn't it just a case of semantics? I can't see all the complications?

A 'purebred' that is bought from a pound or a rescue organisation is purebred because it is obvious that it's antecendants were all of the same breed, and it looks exactly like that breed, but it is not pedigreed unless there are papers to prove it.

Obvious to who? Everyone will view the dog differently depending on their experience with the breed.

[Perfumed Lillium]

I purchased a PUREBRED Japanese Spitz from a breeder who lives down the road from me, her breeding dogs are registered but she hasn't bothered with a prefix, when I posted as much....a couple of posters were adamant that my JS is not a purebred . How'zat? Both his parents AND grandparents have pedigrees YET some people have deemed him NOT a purebred because he didn't come with papers?? I had a chuckle after reading those posts, still makes me chuckle to think that someone implied there could have been anything in his background including cocker spaniel, hahahahahaha. Go figure.....

[Greytmate]

I purchased a PUREBRED Japanese Spitz from a breeder who lives down the road from me, her breeding dogs are registered but she hasn't bothered with a prefix, when I posted as much....a couple of posters were adamant that my JS is not a purebred . How'zat? Both his parents AND grandparents have pedigrees YET some people have deemed him NOT a purebred because he didn't come with papers?? I had a chuckle after reading those posts, still makes me chuckle to think that someone implied there could have been anything in his background including cocker spaniel, hahahahahaha. Go figure.....

No need to chuckle. If the dog's breeder is not prepared to sign her name to an official document (from a registering body) to certify who the parents are, there is always going to be doubt as to which dogs really are the parents. I wouldn't be making any claims about the dog other than it is Japanese Spitz. Without papers, you won't be breeding on with it anyway, so it doesn't matter to anyone else whether your dog is purebred or not.

[Steph M]

I like the take the GSD Obedience Club I trained at years ago had when I told them my pup wasn't papered (pre-limited Registery)...they told me....if it looks like a GSD, we want him to have every oportunity to be trained and socialised...bring him on down.

What constitutes a Purebred today will really depend on it's circumstances. A Cavalier we rescued from a Puppy Farm is microchipped and came originally from a Registered Bredder, somehow got sold on and ended up in a bad situation, no papers available for him...has been signed over but can't prove he is a "purebred" but clearly he is.

I think that's wonderful, and do hope more have the same approach!

I guess often a poorly socialised dog who hurts a child or another dog, regardless of papers or purity will reflect badly on everyone involved in the breed if it's marked as one, so I can see where this attitude is a benefit.

[Pippa]

I purchased a PUREBRED Japanese Spitz from a breeder who lives down the road from me, her breeding dogs are registered but she hasn't bothered with a prefix, when I posted as much....a couple of posters were adamant that my JS is not a purebred . How'zat? Both his parents AND grandparents have pedigrees YET some people have deemed him NOT a purebred because he didn't come with papers?? I had a chuckle after reading those posts, still makes me chuckle to think that someone implied there could have been anything in his background including cocker spaniel, hahahahahaha. Go figure.....

Thats a real worry that a breeder would not be careful enough about her breeding to bother with a prefix. I hope she bothered to observe the mating. I would not be calling my dog a purebred unless I had the papers to prove it.

[minimax]

I purchased a PUREBRED Japanese Spitz from a breeder who lives down the road from me, her breeding dogs are registered but she hasn't bothered with a prefix, when I posted as much....a couple of posters were adamant that my JS is not a purebred . How'zat? Both his parents AND grandparents have pedigrees YET some people have deemed him NOT a purebred because he didn't come with papers?? I had a chuckle after reading those posts, still makes me chuckle to think that someone implied there could have been anything in his background including cocker spaniel, hahahahahaha. Go figure.....

Thats a real worry that a breeder would not be careful enough about her breeding to bother with a prefix. I hope she bothered to observe the mating. I would not be calling my dog a purebred unless I had the papers to prove it.

Something tells me her dogs are probably not even mains registered...

[Steph M]

Surely if you're going to go to all the effort of ensuring they have these great bloodlines, the parents are on show and they have papers etc then going for a prefix and registering your good, hard work and great intentions is the logical next step?

I don't understand the 'couldn't be bothered with'

It's like creating the Mona Lisa and deciding you CBF signing it, really.

Sounds dodgy, purebred or not, that's a moot point, I am sure there's a reason the breeder can't be arsed applying to register herself and her dogs.

[Weasels]

I recently read a book where a scientist was arguing (not very convincingly IMO) that there was no such thing as a pure dingo.

If scientists can't even agree on where 'purity' starts and ends with breeds separated for thousands of years, it seems unlikely that people will agree for lineages mostly a couple hundred years deep :)

Edited September 2, 2012 by Weasels

[dancinbcs]

I recently read a book where a scientist was arguing (not very convincingly IMO) that there was no such thing as a pure dingo.

If scientists can't even agree on where 'purity' starts and ends with breeds separated for thousands of years, it seems unlikely that people will agree for lineages mostly a couple hundred years deep :)

There has been extensive DNA research over many years to prove the purity of the Dingo breed and those preserving the breed use this information to ensure they are in fact breeding purbred Dingos, not crossbreds with some other breed lurking in the background. They can even identify the different strains of Dingos. Prof Alan Wilton who developed the DNA health tests for Border Collies did the Dingo research and was famous for it in the scientific world.

[espinay2]

I think there are different layers being discussed, and some are confusing these layers.

Sticking to the ones under discussion (without muddying the waters with issues such as 'landrace' which will only confuse some I think), here it is in a nutshell:

'Purebred' - a dog which has both parents (and grandparents and great grandparents) of the same breed. A purebred dog will 'breed pure' in that its progeny will all look and act alike in accordance with a type or standard.

All other concepts being discussed are about LEVELS OF PROOF that a dog is pure of breed.

A dog that is deemed to be pure of breed based on looks alone has a lower level of proof from one where the parents are known. It may still be a pure bred dog, but there is a possibility that it also may not be. Pure breed rescues will often accept this lower level of proof for the sake of the dog who generally looks and acts like their breed. In a rescue situation, that element of the unknown is accepted as the dog is generally being removed from the genepool (via desexing etc). A Backyard breeder also offers a lower level of proof which can vary in degree from very low to almost no proof, to a reasonable chance it is what they say. A dog with a certified pedigree however, has an even greater level of proof. Its breeding is agreed, known and certified for many generations, making its genetics in terms of its breed a well known entity.

Level of proof becomes particularly important when someone is considering BREEDING a dog. When breeding a dog it is more advantageous to have the highest level of proof available. Particularly for the breed, as this ensure the breed continues in a pure and known form. Breeders who provide a lower level of proof are a bit like a river backwater. They do not contribute to the main stream of the breed going forward through the generations and the genetics are 'lost' to the breed as a whole as it is not documented on that central register.

Proof is also important when someone wants to be sure about what they are getting instead of leaving some level of doubt that sometimes has them asking sometime down the track 'do you think he is pure? now I am not so sure' (edited to add - or if they have a breed where positive proof of what it is....or is not ... is potentially important, such as under current Victorian legislation). Be on this forum often enough and you see those posts from time to time from people buying 'pure bred' dogs from unregistered breeders. Some may be willing to accept this lesser level of proof. But it is fact that without a certified pedigree, that element of unknown - that lesser standard of proof - will always be there.

Edited September 2, 2012 by espinay2

[mixeduppup]

I know what you mean, I was given my maremma and sometimes I look at him and wonder.

[mita]

here it is in a nutshell:

And a jolly good nutshell it is, too. I'm saving your post because it answers the question 'What is a purebred?' with precision and clarity.

[dogsaremyworld]

I purchased a PUREBRED Japanese Spitz from a breeder who lives down the road from me, her breeding dogs are registered but she hasn't bothered with a prefix, when I posted as much....a couple of posters were adamant that my JS is not a purebred . How'zat? Both his parents AND grandparents have pedigrees YET some people have deemed him NOT a purebred because he didn't come with papers?? I had a chuckle after reading those posts, still makes me chuckle to think that someone implied there could have been anything in his background including cocker spaniel, hahahahahaha. Go figure.....

I made no implication what so ever that YOUR JS pup may have cocker spaniel in him. I was making a general point about dogs that look like a certain breed, and whose parents look like a certain breed may posess a great-great-great-great grandmother that is a totally different breed all together, and without the paperwork, and a record of registry of that dog you cannot prove that it is a purebred dog. Unfortunately alot of BYB'ers and puppy farmers seem to use the fact that the parents are pedigree as evidence that the pup is one as well. The tricks they play are disgusting. I have heard the most horrible tricks people have played to try and charge just that little extra for a purebred dog.

I get so frustrated with breeders (not the puppy purchasers) who tell little fibs to make out a pup is something that it is not. You speak about this breeder as if she just didn't want the bother of getting a prefix, but she is just the same as a registered breeder. A prefix is neither hard, nor that expensive to get. And no reputable show person would be caught dead breeding outside the system, without a prefix. Because that would make them a BYB, at best, and or liable to prosecution and suspension from thier state canine authority. Even if as you say she is using 'registered' dogs to breed unregistered puppies she is breaking her state canine's Code of Ethics, and really should be reported.

Your male pup, looks like a very cute and very gorgeous Japanese Spitz like pup. And the BYB you got him from seems to be of the higher quality (after all she let you view the parents, and see the establishment where they were born). He does look a little leggy, but alot of toy dogs go through a range of stages, so that is probably the answer. Whether he is pedigree, or purebred, will probably not affect the happy life the two of you will live together, and the love you will share with your very cute pup. But without that piece of paper he is not pedigree'd, and you cannot prove that he is purebred either.

[Steve]

In the UK now dogs can be entered onto a pedigree based on how they resemble the breed - but they have to go through 4 generation of back to papered purebreds to be able to have its puppies considered purebreds.

Breeds in development often simply add a dog of unknown parentage based on its characteristics into a pedigree and its the same when ever a stud book is opened.

Of course you can take a dog with a pedigree and mate it to a dog of the same breed with a pedigree and issue a birth certificate or pedigree for it without registering it. Same dog would be produced as it would be if it were a registered pedigree

BUT

Registered pedigrees arent just used as evidence of heritage and ancestors. Its used by a good breeder to map temperaments, genetics, colours, and many other characteristics to enable the current breeder and all those in that breed who come behind them to breed better healthier dogs.Without that pedigree being registered the information needed to do this is lost and only ever able to be used by one person who mates a dog - if they happen to know anything that will impact [unlikely] .People who are really breeding need to be sure that there is no mistake about parentage and ancestry and have the ability to pass on information to other breeders.

Any one can breed a dog, anyone can breed a purebred dog but not everyone can consistently breed healthy happy puppies generation after generation which are able to be predictible and bring their families joy and fewer vet bills.

This is the basic ground level difference between someone who just breeds dogs regardless of their reasons and a breeder .

To a pet owner these papers may not seem to matter but they matter more than most people realise in the progression it took to produce that puppy and all that will come in the future. Science has afforded us the ability to test for many health and genetic issues but there are many which can only be seen and avoided by careful profiling of that pedigree and there always will be.

Being able to have one of these registered pedigrees issued for your dog is not only evidence of its ancestry but also evidence that the breeder cared enough for this litter and all which come into the future to record the information to be able to be used by them and others working within the breed to ensure they really are breeding for the betterment of their dogs and the breed.

Any breeder who is breeding dogs without doing everything they can to track good and bad traits and issues and lodging the information with a the registry which makes it accessible to others and who insist they are doing everything the same as a registered breeder does but without the paper work is fooling themselves and they don't understand what it means to truly breed dogs. They don't understand what it really takes to select a stud and truly work at getting it as right as we can - consistently right now and forever. Not with luck or ignorance but with science and knowledge.

Now I dont mind if others dont get that and they want to determine a purebred by whether it looks like the breed or not but for me the more tools I have and the more tools I can provide to someone else in my breed the better so dont go and denigrate what I do by judging some mutt without papers as the same as what I breed or lump me in with someone who is only concerned by one litter and works with nothing more than blind luck.

[dogsaremyworld]

My link

A link to Wiki's definiton of purebred.