I would be interested in peoples opinions as to when they feel a crossbreed stops being a crossbreed and becomes a breed in it's own right.
Is it after x number of generations or should it be when type has been established? Having said that type doesn't seem to have been established in many pure breeds these days!
I don't want this to turn into an argument about whether people should create new breeds today or not I just would like to know peoples opinions as to when they are no longer a cross breed :D
Bec

Interesting question :) I know what you mean as friends have a gundog breed (won't say which one, but a relatively new breed to this country :) ) and had a puppy that looked quite different from their other dogs.

Daisy

Well, for me it is when type is so established that no matter who the dam or sire the progeny are true to type. There is always the odd pup that may be a poor example but I would want a 99.5% true examples of the breed, producing to the same 99.5%.

Well based on Bruce Catanagh's experiment with using corgi to get Bob tailed boxer, and having them accepted on the breed register once he had bred back to boxer for four generations I would think a dog would have to have 3 full generations of the new breed behind it.

A recent post on her outlined the situation with the Irish KC and Jack Ruyssels, and it would seem that once there are 3 generations of known ancestors that the dogs are fully accpted, and earlier generations are on a development register.

They would of course have to breed to accepted type (and most standards have accepted variations).

With my first breed the BSD, there was a dog that was assessed by a champ show judge as being a pure Groenendael, and was used in the early lines hear with parents unknown, and registered as Noir De Rhodesia, and was in the fifth generation behind the bitch I owned born in 1988.