Page 1

Revised March 2010

Registry Recognition • Breed-up Program • Sanctioned Shows For purebred livestock industries, the show ring is designed and revolves entirely around the showing of purebred breeding stock. In 2008, alpaca sanctioned shows operating under Alpaca Canada broke from this tradition and extended the show ring to non-purebreds. This was an unexpected move for an industry in which sanctioned shows endorsed by its breed association, the CLAA, had always operated as a purebred venue. Incorporated under the Animal Pedigree Act, the CLAA is the sole breed association in Canada with authority to represent the alpaca breed. As direct descendants of the foundation stock recognized by the Minister of Agriculture as the breed’s original stock, purebreds represent the breed in Canada and form the national herd. Only purebreds may be bred to any other registered alpaca and produce an offspring eligible to be registered. As parents to the next generation, purebreds are the primary breeding animals. Mandated by the Animal Pedigree Act, if an association chooses to register non-purebreds, their certificates must indicate their percentage of purity. While non-purebreds may be registered, they do not represent the Canadian breed due to their lack of sufficient ancestral lineage to the foundation stock or other recognized purebreds of the registry. The primary purpose of the Animal Pedigree Act is to promote breed improvement. As such, the CLAA has offered breed improvement strategies to its members. One such strategy was foreign registry recognition designed to facilitate access to genetics or specific traits that may be lacking in the national herd. This policy was rejected by the membership in early 2008. The CLAA breed-up program is not a breed improvement program. Such programs are rarely, if ever, used to access genetics in another purebred registry of the same breed. It will not advance the breed since ‘near purebreds’ created through the program will have minimal genetics derived from their zeropercent recorded ancestor unlike their early generation percentage-purebred relatives. After the breed-up program was enacted in 2003, the CLAA immediately introduced rules barring stock from this program from showing until attaining purebred status. To permit percentage-purebreds in a purebred sanctioned show endorses foreign registry recognition. For this reason, the program was little used until 2008 when sanctioned shows suddenly were no longer the venue for purebred registered breeding stock. During the summer of 2007, the membership approved by-law amendments to allow percentagepurebreds to be bred together with the offspring maintaining registration status. If approved by the Minister of Agriculture, breeders of percentage-purebreds will never need to advance their herds toward purebred status. Nevertheless, their stock will maintain registration status and full access to the show ring to compete against purebreds. Addressing the shortfalls of using the breed-up program to access high quality foreign genetics, the CLAA Goal 3 Committee stated: “Conceivably the highest quality alpacas in the registry will eventually be percentage purebreds and not alpacas with purebred status even though they would have numerous generations of parent verified pedigree.” By moving away from a purebred show system, the AC Show Committee circumvented foreign registry recognition, a policy rejected by a majority of the membership. If pending by-law changes are approved, the breed-up program combined with show ring access will allow those who favored registry recognition to pursue a modified version of their intended breeding programs. At a future date, should foreign registry recognition be enacted, their percentage-purebreds may be eligible to advance to purebred status. The ramifications of these actions may undermine the integrity of the Canadian alpaca industry.


Registry Recognition • Breed-up Program • Sanctioned Shows

The CLAA is incorporated under the Animal Pedigree Act with some of the advantages of being: “All associations must meet minimum requirements for establishment of rules of procedure, membership, public representation of animals, definition of purebred, etc.” “Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada must review and approve any by-law changes before they come into effect. The review process helps ensure consistency with the Act and other by-laws, and helps breed associations develop clear and workable by-laws.” “Only one association in Canada may establish a definition of purebred, maintain a public registry and issue certificates in respect of a breed. This allows the association to present a public image of the breed which is consistent throughout Canada.” Source: APA Secretary’s Manual, Chapter 2.

As a distinct breed under the Animal Pedigree Act: “Foundation stock animals are referred to in the Animal Pedigree Act as being, "in relation to a distinct breed, [means] such animals as are recognized by the Minister as constituting the breed’s original stock.” The starting basis of a sound registry system is twofold. First, the foundation or original stock must be defined. Second, all registered animals must show a relationship to the foundation population. A registry is really a pedigree tracking system in which rules of eligibility are applied. Under the Animal Pedigree Act no animal may be declared purebred if it does not carry at least 7/8ths relationship back to the original foundation stock or to other registered purebreds of that breed. To register animals which are less than purebred, the association must indicate in its by-laws the definition of purebred and must issue certificates which specify the percentage purebred.” Source: APA Secretary’s Manual, Chapter 2.

The CLAA by-laws state: Purebred: All Animals are eligible to be registered as Purebred if: a) both the sire and the dam are registered in the herd book of the Association as either Foundation Stock or Purebred; or b) The animal has no less than three generations of individually registered Purebred or Foundation Stock ancestors in a recognized foreign registry, and meets all other qualifications for recognition; or c) If an animal is the result of breeding up, it has no less than 15/16 inheritance relating back to Foundation Stock or Purebred ancestry in the herd book of the Association or the equivalent of Foundation Stock and or Purebred ancestry in a recognized foreign registry. At least one parent must be registered Foundation Stock or Purebred in the herd book of the Association.

To date, all purebreds are a product of condition (a). The CLAA does not recognize any foreign registry so there are no purebreds of condition (b). If the breed-up program produces a purebred (15/16th), one of its parents must be purebred (or foundation stock).

• Only purebreds may be bred to any other registered alpaca and produce offspring eligible to be registered. For registries under the Animal Pedigree Act, purebreds represent the breed in Canada.

• As parents to the next generation, purebreds are the primary breeding animals and form the national herd1. For this reason breed associations do not permit other stock in their registries to compete against them in sanctioned shows. • Breeders of purebred stock may wish to question why their stock must compete against percentage-purebred stock in sanctioned shows, events that should be promoting the Canadian breed.

1

The national herd also includes foundation stock but their numbers actively breeding will continue to decline over time. For simplicity, this paper simply refers to their descendants, the purebreds. 2 of 11

March 2010


Registry Recognition • Breed-up Program • Sanctioned Shows

There is provision under the Animal Pedigree Act for breed associations to expand the national herd (purebreds), by allowing breeders to access other genetics by way of recognizing a foreign registry. By setting qualifications for animals to be added, over and above minimum breed standards, foreign registry recognition can be a powerful breed improvement strategy. To be implemented, the membership must first approve recognition of a foreign registry. According to the CLAA by-laws, “no foreign animal may be registered as purebred unless: b) The animal has no less than three generations of individually registered Purebred or Foundation Stock ancestors in a recognized foreign registry, and meets all other qualifications for recognition”

• The provision to enact registry recognition was defeated by the membership in 2008. • The CLAA by-law requirement of a full three-generation pedigree means eight individually registered greatgrandparents. Additional qualifications for acceptance would be addressed by CLAA board policy. • For percentage-purebred alpacas with one parent already a registered CLAA purebred, only the foreign branch of their pedigree would be required to meet the three-generation rule. • Many of the percentage-purebred alpacas currently competing in the show ring would not have sufficient pedigree to qualify as purebred under registry recognition.

The CLAA breed-up program2 was enacted in 2003. “The breeding-up program refers to the sequential use of purebred animals with grade animals (animals not eligible to be registered with the CLAA) over a series of generations to provide a "nearly purebred" result. The first generation offspring will be eligible for 50% Purebred status, the second 75% and so on until the offspring reach 15/16th or officially, Purebred status.” Source: CLAA web site

Upon being enacted, the CLAA introduced strict rules pertaining to the showing of stock from this 3 program; the fact that the progeny were registered did not matter. “Since it is also not registry recognition the 0% recorded animal nor any of its progeny until pure-bred status is reached will be permitted to compete in CLASS sanctioned shows against pure-bred CLAA registered animals.” Source: CLAA Bulletin March 2004

• Since ‘nearly purebreds’ created through the breed-up program are little different than existing purebreds, the program is not breed improvement; it will not advance the breed. (See Appendix A for an illustrative example) • The CLAA has no authority to approve registry recognition; only the membership can do so through a vote. To permit percentage-purebreds in a purebred sanctioned show endorses registry recognition by granting equivalency status in the show ring. With no access to the show ring, there was little attraction to use the program. • No valid explanation why this program was ever recommended to the membership is known. The breed-up program opened the CLAA registry to imports and resulted in criticism and suspension of further discussion on reciprocity with ARI; a closed registry. ARI has adhered firmly to their purebred requirement that only the offspring of two registered ARI alpacas are eligible for registration.

2

Traditionally, breed-up (grade-up) programs are used to: 1) increase the number of animals of a particular breed by a carefully controlled system of cross-breeding, or 2) increase or fix a single desired feature of a breed. Animals from another breed are used in the process. 3

To register animals less than purebred status, CLAA is required under the APA to ensure the registration certificates issued specify the percentage of purity. 3 of 11

March 2010


Registry Recognition • Breed-up Program • Sanctioned Shows

The CLAA Goal 3 Committee addressed many of the problems associated with using the breed-up program to introduce genetics from foreign registries. As posted to the CLAA website at that time: “When used to bring in foreign registered purebreds (FRP) of high quality the program has several drawbacks: • if the FRP alpaca is bred to purebred alpacas of lesser quality for four generations, the program becomes a Breed Down program which greatly dilutes the influence/impact of the original alpaca. • If the FRP alpaca is bred to a purebred before the resulting offspring (50%) can be bred to other percentage offspring this again is dilution of the characteristics of interest. Also the offspring of the original alpaca may never reach purebred status. Conceivably the highest quality alpacas in the registry will eventually be percentage purebreds and not alpacas with purebred status even though they would have numerous generations of parent verified pedigree. • If the FRP alpaca is bred to offspring of a stud previously brought in for herd improvement (percentage purebred) resultant offspring are not able to be registered even though they would have a minimum of two generations of parent verified pedigree.”

• The committee acknowledges the breed-up program has limited use unless the percentage-purebreds can be bred to each other, as opposed to existing purebreds, with the resulting offspring eligible for registration. • If the breed-up program is used in place of registry recognition the dilemma of having percentage-purebreds as the highest quality alpacas in the registry is noted.

During the summer of 2007, by-law amendments recommended by the CLAA were approved by the membership; including provision to allow percentage-purebreds to be bred together without loss of registration status. At present, for example, if an alpaca of 75% purity is bred to one of 50% purity, the resulting offspring will have 0% purity and will not be eligible to show. This by-law amendment would give the offspring 50% purity. These by-laws are not in force until approved by the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. • The rationale for recommending this by-law change to the membership is not obvious given percentage-purebred stock had at the time of the vote, had never been allowed to compete in sanctioned shows. • This amendment, if enacted, introduces a second breeding group within the registry, the percentage-purebreds. • If enacted, breeders of percentage-purebred alpacas would never need to use purebreds in their breeding programs or ever advance their herds toward purebred status to maintain registration status. In fact, a herd of percentagepurebreds may be maintained indefinitely with full access to the show ring to compete against purebreds. • While the example from the Charolais by-laws was offered by the CLAA, it is important to note for those animals, status is maintained when breeding percentage recorded animals together, not percentage registered animals. The Animal Pedigree Act is very clear about purebreds and their ancestral lineage to the foundation stock from whom the distinct breed is derived; the only animals intended for seed-stock breeding purposes in Canada. • To date the CLAA has made little effort to keep the membership informed on the limitations of using the breed-up program; specifically, that if percentage-purebreds are bred to each other their offspring cannot be registered. • The by-laws pertaining to the breed-up program provided on the CLAA web site are not clear and may easily confuse members. Until enacted, any reference should be unmistakably clear. (See Appendix B)

4 of 11

March 2010


Registry Recognition • Breed-up Program • Sanctioned Shows

From June through August 2007, member questions and Goal 3 Committee responses to a draft proposal on A Proposed Registry Recognition Policy were posted to the CLAA website with Director approval. In response to emails addressed to the CLAA Board, the Directors made one response to clarify some of the questions and misconceptions regarding recognition. The following excerpts are taken from that response as posted to the CLAA website at that time. “When the CLAA was restructured into the Registry Division (the CLAA), Alpaca Canada and Llama Canada the role of the CLAA was limited to the accurate registration of alpacas and llamas and, as mandated by the Animal Pedigree Act, to engage in breed improvement programs. Registry recognition is a legitimate breed improvement tool.” “For breeders interested in raising purebred stock, the Breed Up Program is NOT an alternative to the proposed Recognition Policy. As is understood by all livestock breeders, breed-up programs work by mating purebred animals to animals of other breeds, cross breeds or animals of uncertain genetic origin. In the CLAA program you can import a male from a foreign registry with the BEST genetics outside of CLAA, breed him to a CLAA purebred female and produce a CLAA 50% - a percentage or grade alpaca. There are no livestock registries that attain a highly sought after international reputation based on grade stock. Consequently, for breeders (both domestic and International) interested in purebred stock, the Breed Up Program is of little value. Animals from other registries that meet our stringent registry guidelines and our rules of eligibility deserve to be legally called purebred in Canada.”

• The statements are self-explanatory, the CLAA recognizes the value of registry recognition as a breed improvement tool to advance the national herd and acknowledges the lack of value in the breed-up program.

At the Alpaca Canada (AC) AGM in September 2007, the AC Show Committee presented show rules to be used at AC sanctioned shows commencing with the 2008 show season. Eligibility to show was specifically extended to percentage-purebreds despite no foreign registry recognized by the membership.

• The justification offered by the AC Show Committee is the show system is registry-based, not purebred-based. • Why would a volunteer committee be in charge of such a fundamental decision on behalf of the industry? • Why was there no comment from the CLAA regarding this change? Under the CLAA, sanctioned shows were exclusive to purebreds; to permit percentage-purebreds in a purebred sanctioned show endorses registry recognition. • By switching to a registry-based system the AC Show Committee circumvented the defeat of registry recognition. • Why was there never any membership consultation or explanation offered? • Provisions under the Animal Pedigree Act for registering percentage-purebreds is not intended for breeding animals.

In 2008 Registry Recognition is defeated and the CLAA directs breeders to the breed-up program. “The result of the vote (Registry Recognition) does not affect the existence or operation of our current breed-up program. Alpacas, not eligible for CLAA registration, can be imported into Canada, recorded at 0% and bred to CLAA registered alpacas. The resultant offspring will be eligible for registration as percentage purebreds. The recorded alpacas will not however be given credit for parent verified generational history in a foreign registry as was proposed by the registry recognition policy.” Source: CLAA Bulletin June 2008

• Until 2008, the CLAA has never promoted the breed-up program or suggested it as a breed improvement strategy. To appear to endorse the program upon defeat of the registry recognition vote was unexpected. • Considering past CLAA policy toward percentage-purebreds participating in sanctioned shows, a statement objecting to them being shown before the registry recognition vote was conducted and most certainly upon its defeat would have been expected.

5 of 11

March 2010


Registry Recognition • Breed-up Program • Sanctioned Shows

In February 2009, the Alpaca Canada board unanimously passed a motion to allow zero-percent recorded animals in AC sanctioned shows. Draft minutes containing the motion remained posted to the AC website until September 2009 when they were replaced with minutes in which the motion was removed from record. Alpaca Canada Board of Directors Teleconference Meeting Monday, 02 February 2009 – 5:00 PM BC-time Attendance: Ken Frost, Casey Dewit, Catherine Simpson, Rob Blom, Caecilia Goetze and Scott Sillito. Regrets: Roy Carreiro Catherine Simpson acted as recording secretary. DRAFT Minutes: (AC_Minutes Feb 02 09.pdf) Show Committee Motion: Motioned by Scott, seconded by Rob that the Show Committee change the Show Rules in 2010 to allow 0% animals recorded in the breed-up program to be eligible to enter sanctioned AC Shows. CARRIED Minutes: (AC_Minutes Feb 02 09_2_.pdf) Show (Scott) - nothing to report

• Why would the board of a national organization unanimously pass a motion then remove it from record? Such actions appear to not comply with Robert’s Rules of Order. • What might have precipitated such actions? • Does the membership not deserve an explanation?

The CLAA Business Plan 2009-2014 emphasizes purebred stock and purebred breeders throughout the report with only a brief reference to the breed-up program. “The Association has also implemented a breed-up pedigree program for non-purebred animals.” p.3 “Canadians may also access foreign camelids not eligible for registration through a newly created breedup program. The breeding-up program refers to the process of consecutively breeding animals towards a purebred status. Animals that are registered as purebreds can be bred to animals of unknown genetic origin.” p. 11. “3.7 Critical Success Factors for the Industry ... · Co-operation between the CLAA, Alpaca Canada (AC) and Llama Canada (LC) to ensure that this Canadian Registry and the Canadian Breed is promoted. · A recognition that not all llama or alpaca owners need or should become members of the CLAA - only if their interest or plan lies in becoming a purebred breeder.” p. 14 Source: CLAA Business Plan 2009-2014

• The breed-up program is mentioned briefly and not the focus of the 5-year plan. It was added to the by-laws in 2003 so is not all that newly created. • Percentage-purebred alpacas are not part of the national herd and do not represent the ‘Canadian Breed’. • Note the emphasis on success for the industry depending on only purebred breeders being members of the CLAA. Where does that leave breeders of non-purebred animals created through the breed-up program?

6 of 11

March 2010


Registry Recognition • Breed-up Program • Sanctioned Shows

CLAA by-law amendments awaiting approval: “Breeding-Up Amendment Animal Pedigree Officer David Trus, has reviewed the proposed amendments to the breed-up program and offered some wording changes along with suggestions for the calculation of percentages. While the Directors considered the changes they requested the Alpaca Pedigree Committee’s recommendations.” Source: CLAA BOD minutes, June 13, 2007. .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

“The Government’s delay in accepting the CLAA by-law amendments submitted in 2007 is causing problems. President Daniel Eslake has contacted Mr Trus, but has yet to receive a reply as to when the Association may expect to receive the Minister of Agriculture’s decision on the amendments.” Source: CLAA BOD minutes, Sep. 21, 2009. .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

“Walter Coombs has written (via email and Canada Post) to David Trus about the 2007 bylaw amendments, but at the time of the meeting had not heard back from him.” Source: CLAA BOD minutes, Jan. 19, 2010.

• Why would the CLAA directors not have adopted Mr. Trus’ suggestions for the calculation of percentages without any explanation? • It is now over two and a half years since the membership approved the by-law amendments. As of yet, there is no response from the Animal Pedigree Officer.

In November 2009 the AC Show Committee surveyed the membership with five questions: “We have asked some specific questions regarding some changes that were made last year.”

Question 3 read: “Do you agree that only animals that possess a CLAA registration certificate be allowed to show?” “Reasoning: The Show Committee felt that shows should showcase Canadian registered breeding stock and maintain common direction with current Canadian initiatives which is clearly spelled out by the Breed Up Program and our own registry requirements. Because we have a Breed Up Program in Canada as recognized by the Animal Pedigree Act, we felt it was important to allow percentage animals in the ring as well. This gives breeders the chance to prove imported bloodlines through their progeny. Also, as indicated by the membership last year, breeders did not wish to recognize (Recognition Vote) non-CLAA registered animals into our registry at this time so the show committee felt this was keeping in line with the current view of the majority of the membership.”

• Sanctioned shows have always required CLAA registration certificates; this is not new. • Despite this, a 2009 rule change allows ‘0% recorded’ animals without certificates to compete in group classes. • The CLAA breed-up program is not new and it is not a breed improvement program. It is only briefly mentioned in the CLAA 5-year Business Plan; how can it be a ‘current Canadian initiative’? • Many breed associations under the Animal Pedigree Act have breed-up (grade-up) programs; they are not permitted to compete against their purebred stock. • Although based on a re-write of the CLASS rules, at no time did the AC Show Committee inform the membership of the major departure from that purebred-based show system. • By switching to a registry-based show system the AC Show Committee circumvented registry recognition, a policy that was rejected by a majority of the membership.

7 of 11

March 2010


Registry Recognition • Breed-up Program • Sanctioned Shows

Final comments: • In February 2008, five years after the breed-up program was enacted, there were four ‘0% recorded’ males. At the writing of this paper, some fifteen breeders have imported ‘0% recorded’ males and in excess of forty ‘0% recorded’ males are listed with the CLAA. The reason for this increase can be directly attributed to show ring access. • Canadian livestock industries operating under the Animal Pedigree Act have garnered international reputation as suppliers of superior breeding stock; promotion and protection of their purebred stock is integral to this success. • If the by-law amendments to the breed-up program are approved, it has been suggested the highest quality animals in the registry may be the percentage-purebreds. With the current show system designed to force purebred stock to compete directly with percentage-purebreds, any credibility as a source of purebred seed stock may be lost. • The designations ‘% pure’ and ‘purebred’ on certificates cannot be ignored, these are mandated by the Animal Pedigree Act; to gloss over this distinction and simply refer to them as ‘registered’ is shortsighted. For closed registries such as the ARI where only purebreds may be registered, this is not an issue. • Should the by-law amendments not be approved, there may be resentment from breeders who feel they have embraced a legitimate breed-up program endorsed by their breed association. Not surprising for many, their percentage-purebreds hold purebred status with ARI; others may not be so fortunate. • While percentage-purebreds, no different than their ‘0% recorded’ relative, may be premier examples of the ‘breed’, due to their lack of ancestral lineage to CLAA foundation stock, they do not represent the ‘Canadian breed’, as defined by the Animal Pedigree Act. • Foreign registry recognition remains the only appropriate route to access foreign genetics through the acquisition of premier stock from other purebred registries and adding them to the CLAA national herd of purebreds. • Sanctioned shows should promote the national breed, the purebreds.

CLAA Board and Committee Members CLAA Board of Directors - 2006 President: John MacLeod Treasurer: Linda Laprairie

Vice-President: Keith Molder Director Tracy Banner

Secretary: Walter Coombs;

Vice-President: Violet Racz Director: Walter Coombs (LC)

Secretary/Treasurer: Linda Laprairie Director: Edwin Wyatt/Allan Johnson (AC)

Vice-President: Violet Racz Director: Walter Coombs (LC)

Treasurer: John MacLeod Director: Allan Johnson (AC)

CLAA Board of Directors - 2007 President: Keith Molder Director: Tracy Banner CLAA Board of Directors - 2008 President/Secretary: Daniel Eslake Director: Linda Laprairie

CLAA - Alpaca Pedigree Committee 2006 - 2007 Keith Molder (Board Liaison); Daniel Eslake; Susan Mackey; Clint Straub CLAA – Goal 3 Alpaca Committee (Recognition) Nov/06 – Feb/08 Keith Molder; John MacLeod; Catherine Simpson (AC President); Todd Burton; Joyce Maley; (Ontario member) Alpaca Canada Show Committee 2007 - 2008 Jill MacLeod; Carol Poole; Tracy Banner; Jane Tellier; Trudy McCall; Karen Jarvis; Stella Beniuk (Board Liaison)

Note: It is not the intention of this paper to question the dedication and commitment of the individuals listed above to the Canadian alpaca industry. However, it may important to be aware who served on the CLAA and these committees during the time period when recommendations and decisions were made influencing the direction of the industry. These individuals are also breeders with their own breeding programs and marketing plans; some involved in the acquisition and importation of ARI-only registered males during the same time.

8 of 11

March 2010


Registry Recognition • Breed-up Program • Sanctioned Shows

Appendix A The breed-up program – an illustrative example: Suppose a breeder of high quality purebred stock feels he cannot find a purebred male to raise the quality 4 of his stock. He purchases a genetically superior male from a foreign registry and records him at 0%. Bred to one of his purebred females P1, the following year they will produce the first generation offspring G1 of 50% purity. The quality of G1 will fall between P1 and 0%, most likely half way between. Year 2

50% Pure (1/2)

P1

---------------------->

G1

<----------------------

0%

Let us assume G1 is female and the breeder mates her at one year of age to his highest quality unrelated purebred male P2. A purebred must be used otherwise the offspring will not be eligible to be registered. The offspring of the second generation G2 of 75% purity will result and G2 will most likely be of quality half way between P2 and G1. Year 4

75% Pure (3/4)

P2

--------> G2 <---------

G1

Fortunately, G2 is also female. A subsequent breeding the following year to another high quality unrelated purebred male P3 yields the third generation G3 of 87.5% purity. Again, G3 will most likely be of quality half way between P3 and G2. Year 6

87.5% Pure (7/8)

P3 --> G3 <---- G2

Again, G3 is female and will be bred the following year to P4, another purebred male and yields the forth generation G4 of 93.74% purity with quality between P4 and G3. Year 8

93.74% Pure (15/16)

P4 G4

G3

Finally, a ‘nearly purebred’ G4 has been produced with sufficient purity to qualify as a purebred. Year 9

Purebred

G4

At last, a full 9 years after starting, G4 is ready for the show ring. This is the shortest time period possible to create purebred stock using the breed-up program. Look closely at what has happened during the process. Although the breeder began with a genetically superior male (0%), each breeding back to purebred stock will, on average, lower the quality in each subsequent generation until G4 appears not unlike any of the purebred stock the breeder already owned. Year 2

50% Pure (1/2)

P1

---------------------->

Year 4

75% Pure (3/4)

P2

--------> G2 <---------

Year 6

87.5% Pure (7/8)

Year 8

93.74% Pure (15/16) | Purebred

Year 9

4

G1 | G1

<----------------------

0%

P3 --> G3 <---- G2 | P4 G4 G3 | G4

Accurate selection of a genetically superior male is key to this example. 9 of 11

March 2010


Registry Recognition â&#x20AC;˘ Breed-up Program â&#x20AC;˘ Sanctioned Shows

This is not surprising; examine the pedigree of G4 assuming a full pedigree (all ancestors not specifically identified are simply called purebred). The genetically superior male (0%) appears as one out of 16 great grandparents, the other 15 all existing purebred stock. This is what breed-up (grade-up) programs are intended to do; to ensure the national herd of purebred stock (the breed) is not jeopardized when crossing with other breeds.

This is also why not allowing percentage purebreds in the show ring was an effective deterrent from breeders using the program to access genetics from foreign registries. The early generation stock, G1 and G2, would most likely perform well in the show ring against his purebred stock. A breeder simply interested in marketing stock would be inclined to sell the early generation stock to other breeders so he does not have to continue breeding them and their progeny to purebred stock. Meanwhile, he returns to breeding the high-end early generation stock. If the breeder is able to breed his G1 and G2 stock to others of similar caliber and maintain offspring registration status, he will be able to maintain a herd of percentage-purebreds of higher quality than his original purebred herd. Access to a show system based simply on registration and not on purebred status is critical to the success of such a breeding program.

10 of 11

March 2010


Registry Recognition • Breed-up Program • Sanctioned Shows

Appendix B By-laws currently in force “(7) Breeding Up: Animals may be registered as Percentage Purebred, which have less than 15/16 inheritance provided that: a) all known ancestors are the same breed, and the subject animal has one parent registered as Foundation Stock or Purebred; b) Animals not eligible for registration may be recorded in the Registry, as 0%, for purposes of breeding up provided that all known ancestors are of the same breed and the subject animals meet the Association’s minimum breed standards for the species or breed. The Board shall ensure that the animal complies with breed standards before recording. This will require screening to the standards. No certificate will be issued for a recorded animal. For the offspring of such an animal to be registered as Percentage Purebred, the subject animal must have been mated with a registered Foundation Stock or Purebred male or female of the same breed. c) Animals will not be eligible to enter the breed up program if the Applicant or the Association is aware of any genetic disorders in the animal, or any of its ancestors. d) Percentage Purebred Certificates: Certificates for Percentage Purebred animals shall be of a different colour than those issued for Foundation Stock and Purebred animals. The percent of inheritance shall be clearly displayed on the certificate according to the following table:”

Presentation on the CLAA web site “The program is summarised in our by laws as follows: (7) Breeding Up: Alpacas may be registered as Percentage Purebred which have less than 15/16 inheritance provided that all known ancestors are of the same breed, and the subject alpaca has a minimum purebred inheritance of 50% and that: a. For those alpacas conceived after the approval of this amendment, by the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-food Canada, a minimum purebred inheritance of 50% shall mean that one parent is registered with the Association as Foundation stock or Purebred and the other parent is recorded with the Association as 0%. b. Alpacas not eligible for registration in the herd book of the Association, may be recorded with the Association at 0% and used in the breed up program provided the applicant, when applying to record the 0% alpaca shall provide a DNA profile for the purpose of parent verification requirements. The application must also declare that the parents are of the same breed. c. Should a foreign pedigree exist for a 0% recorded alpaca all available information such as foreign registered names, foreign pedigree and numbers shall be printed on the certificate of any Percentage Purebred alpaca resulting from the breeding of this, 0% recorded alpaca. For the offspring of 0% alpacas referred to in this article to be registered as 50% purebred, the 0% alpaca must first have been mated with a Foundation Stock or Purebred male or female. d. The offspring from two registered Percentage parents may be registered as Percentage Purebred at the level equal to the lower of the two percentage parents.” 11 of 11

March 2010

Paper  
Paper  

explanation

Advertisement