In response to the specific revisions endorsed by the delegation at the June Annual Meeting the Breed Definition Committee has developed the following revised Definition of a Breed proposal. As agreed to at the October 1998 Board Meeting the basic definition remains unchanged.
The definition presumes the following:
Rationale for Item 3: The above items outline specifically a procedure that did not exist in CFA prior to the addressing of this concern by the Breed Council membership in the original Breed Definition polling. Most breeds in CFA, because of already established avenues of new bloodlines, will never need to consider such a program. However, for those who do, the Committee believes that the objectives of the breed that is petitioning for outcross can be reached more quickly by addressing the items listed above. Addressing these items at the beginning of the program will also insure the protection of any recognized breeds used as outcrosses.
Rationale for Item 4: The original Breed Definition Committee report identified the biggest problem confronting CFA in this area to be the production of AOV look-alikes in breeds which continue to outcross to parent breeds. The definition asked that the 9 breeds, which still outcross establish an estimated outcrossing cutoff date. One of these breeds was permitted to outcross indefinitely because of expert opinions that the special nature of the breed required such continued outcrossing. The basis of the committee's recommendation was that the majority of the breeds in CFA either do not outcross or have established cutoff dates for outcrossing. The 1979 Rules for the Acceptance of New Breeds and Colors requires that all new breeds, before being accepted by CFA for championship status, set an estimated cutoff date. The Committee believed that establishing cutoff dates for all breeds would be a step toward the reduction in the number of AOV look-alikes.
However at the Annual meeting a resolution was passed by the delegation which stated: Each breed council with a 60% majority will determine when it is safe and appropriate to set cutoff dates for outcrossing. The Committee understands that some breeds with very limited gene pools may not, at this time, be able to give any estimate of when they could consider the setting of a cutoff date. It may be that some of the eight breeds may not be able to end outcrossing in the foreseeable future. The committee believes that concerns articulated at the Annual that the Board would endanger breeds by ending their outcrossing prematurely were unwarranted; however, our task has been to address those concerns while still abiding by the wishes of the vast majority of CFA breeders.
Therefore, the committee recommends that in lieu of the prior statement regarding cutoff dates the establishment of a no look-alike policy as outlined in Item 4 be instituted. This will give the 9 breeds still outcrossing the opportunity to set their own cutoff dates but will assure the breeds that are being used that their identities will be protected.
The Breed Definition listed above will in no way change any of the current breeds in CFA. The requirement concerning the setting of cut-off dates for the eight breeds named in the previous proposal has been removed. The long-standing policies of CFA will be maintained. Although the Committee knows that not every breed will be happy with this definition we believe that the majority of CFA breeders support the changes. We believe the definition protects the interests of the majority of CFA's breeds and breeders. The CFA Board at its February meeting agreed to send this revised definition back to the Breed Councils for a vote. We do, however, believe that this must be a general question. The exclusion of even one breed from the provisions of this definition will render the definition meaningless.
Breed Definition Committee
