"breed Id" Threads

[RuralPug]

OK, just wanting to get something clear. We all know that a Heinz 57, mutt, mongrel, multi-cross-mix whatever you want to call them isn't a breed.

But when you have to describe a randomly crossbred dog (or microchip it, or register it with council) "medium mutt" isn't acceptable. So it is necessary to identify it as a something cross for the records. And so opinions are sought on what the dog most resembles and/or what is most likely in its ancestry.

I do understand that this is first and foremost a purebred forum, and I can see why some people are annoyed at mutts being identified in this fashion, but from a rescue point of view it is a necessity more often than not. And we are not breeding them, only desexing and rehoming, but we would rather that the ID be as useful as possible rather than a random stab in the dark, which is why we ask on a purebreed forum.

What I would like to know is where is the best place for these threads? Should they stay in the rescue forum or can we put them in general where we are likely to get more opinions/suggestions from experienced people? Or, as some have suggested, should they not be on DOL at all?

ETA for typos - even though I proofread it four times!

Edited May 24, 2012 by RuralPug

[melzawelza]

I really don't know why people get up in arms about these threads. It's a bit of fun and like you said, helpful for people that have to put a breed on their Council rego/chip.

I think general as they will get the most views from people. If you don't want to read them, don't click on the thread! It's not that hard...

[persephone]

Forum rule #4 has this bit ...

Also no 'What Breeds are in my Dog' type discussion.

so maybe ask Troy what he will permit , and where?That way everyone knows ....

Edited May 24, 2012 by persephone

[Diva]

I really don't know why people get up in arms about these threads.

Reasons why I don't like people guessing the breed of a mixed-breed and then the dog being marketed as that or labelled as that officially?

- it implies breed differences are just about looks. They aren't.

-it implies cross breeds look like their parents. They very often don't and most people guessing don't have a clue how different offspring can look from parents when not pure bred.

- it can mislead adopters - for example, label a cream fluffy part Maremma a cream fluffy part Golden Retriever instead and watch the typical guarding and barking behaviours of the former breed surprise the hell out of the new owner, LOL.

- it implies mixed breeds are mostly first crosses and therefore ascribes far more direct or indirect responsibility for the unwanted dog population to pure breed breeders than is fair.

- if the mixed breed dog gets into trouble, the made up and guessed pure breed named gets the blame even though it probably doesn't have a drop of the breed in it - for example, can't trust those "insert breed here", look at this story in the paper.

- weirdly, it seems to be quite often done by people who decry truly pure bred dogs as elitist, but they still want to pretend their mixed-breed is one and often choose really rare breeds to be part of the made-up cross. Did I mention weird?

But if people have to guess, I don't care where. As long as they don't kid themselves that, apart from a couple of common crosses of common breeds, they have terribly much assurance of being right or that the dog truly is a first cross (unless it's an oodle). I think 'what breed is this' threads would be better labelled 'any pure breed whatever in this dog do you reckon'.

Edited May 24, 2012 by Diva

[RuralPug]

Forum rule #4 has this bit ...

Also no 'What Breeds are in my Dog' type discussion.

so maybe ask Troy what he will permit , and where?That way everyone knows ....

Thanks for that!! I read those rules twice over and still managed not to see that! Well that is clear enough, I guess we have to just use an alternative board for those. Better dust off my password and login elsewhere...

[Purdie]

There is an M&M's thread in sub forums but it can be hard to find for newcomers.;perhaps if there was a more prominant link to it from the home bage if thats the correct term.

Then these what breed threads could be part of that thread or in the rescue forum.I don't see the harm in these threads however i understand some would like to keep the emphasis more on the Pure Breed discussion.

[persephone]

I also think that, from a rescue perspective, 'wotami' threads could be very useful ..perhaps a system like the breeders' thread ?

[Weasels]

I'm just in it for the adorable photos :cool:

[Rebanne]

just register the dog as what it looks like. Worked for me. And be honest with adopters that they are adopting a mutt and you have no way of knowing what breeds went into the makeup of their dog. I dislike the what am I threads and fully agree with Diva. The dogs are mutt's, admit it and get on with life. Never made me love my mutt less then my purebreds.

[raineth]

but what about in the case that is in General at the moment? That dog looks like it is in fact a purebred dog.

Wouldn't it be helpful to have these threads so people who have adopted from the pound or rescue and have suspicions that there dog is purebred and want some help to work out whether it is or isn't?

I personally don't have any problem with people asking even with a dog that is obviously a mutt. People are just curious that's all. I accept my dog is a mutt, but still occasionally wonder if he's a cross and what breeds went into him, or wonder whether he is from a long line of mutts.

[SwaY]

but what about in the case that is in General at the moment? That dog looks like it is in fact a purebred dog.

Wouldn't it be helpful to have these threads so people who have adopted from the pound or rescue and have suspicions that there dog is purebred and want some help to work out whether it is or isn't?

And this is another reason why I think the micro-chip database should have a space for the Registered Breeders Prefix/Name and contact details.

1) You will know it's a registered purebred pedigree dog

2) Call the breeder if you can't contact the owner

3) Let the breeder know it's been found to collect it if the owner can not be found

[SwaY]

I attended a lecture on Dog DNA testing a few years ago, often the dog you see before you is not what the dogs DNA says it is.

As an example it may look like a Pug, but it's DNA says it is a Cav x Pom.

[SwaY]

And if you don't know what it is, put down what it most resembles - other people have to be able to guess the breed should the dog turn up in the pound etc.

[Squidgy]

I'm just in it for the adorable photos :cool:

:laugh:

[Squidgy]

I also think that, from a rescue perspective, 'wotami' threads could be very useful ..perhaps a system like the breeders' thread ?

[nawnim]

...

Edited May 31, 2012 by padraic

[Sheridan]

Then perhaps the solution is one thread pinned in the rescue forum so there aren't so many.

[nawnim]

...

Edited May 31, 2012 by padraic

[dancinbcs]

And if you don't know what it is, put down what it most resembles - other people have to be able to guess the breed should the dog turn up in the pound etc.

Another problem is owners that don't know what they own. When I worked for AWL many years ago some people came looking for a dog to replace their one who had disappeared and never been found. They were quite irate find their dog in our kennels when they had rung and reported him missing. They had reported a crossbred Beagle but they in fact owned a purebred Foxhound and didn't know what it was. The really sad thing was that the pound and none of the other staff (besides me)at AWL had a clue what it was either but they at least tried to find out what the reg number tattoed in the ear was for. The hound was registered to a hunt club in Vic but had been picked up on the road by a trucky and given to his friends in Sydney.

[Weasels]

I attended a lecture on Dog DNA testing a few years ago, often the dog you see before you is not what the dogs DNA says it is.

As an example it may look like a Pug, but it's DNA says it is a Cav x Pom.

I wouldn't automatically assume the DNA testing was more correct though.

I had the brown dog in my sig DNA tested last year, for laffs. The results came back as only 1/3 kelpie. I have my doubts.