Evolution

The Boerboel has undergone considerable changes since the establishment of organised breeding in the 1980s. While the original farm dogs were selected primarily for their usefulness, the introduction of breed standards, registration systems and organised appraisal gradually brought greater emphasis to appearance and uniformity.

Some changes were necessary and beneficial. Others raised concerns among breeders and people involved in the early development of the registered Boerboel.

Interestingly, many of the issues discussed today were already being questioned more than twenty years ago.

From Function to Appearance

The traditional Boerboel was expected to be a capable farm dog. Strength, sound movement, endurance, confidence and a stable temperament were all important characteristics.

Appearance mattered, but a dog's usefulness could not be judged by its size or physical presence alone.

As the breed gained popularity, however, greater attention was directed towards weight, height and increasingly impressive physical proportions.

In November 2002, Dr. Coen Bezuidenhout and Dr. Peter Milstein published Pitfalls in Boerboel Improvement in the HBSA Boerboel Bulletin.

They questioned whether the breed had developed in the direction originally intended by those who established organised breeding.

Their concerns included excessive size, poor structural proportions, weak joints and declining movement and agility.

They also pointed out that certain structural weaknesses seen in later breeding populations had reportedly been unacceptable during the early appraisal tours.

The article provides valuable evidence that concerns about exaggeration and the loss of functional qualities were already being raised relatively early in the breed's modern history.

The Question of Temperament

Temperament was another issue addressed in the 2002 article.

The authors described the earlier Boerboel as a family dog and expressed concern about reports of unpredictable aggression in some more recently bred dogs.

They questioned whether sufficient attention was being given to excluding unsuitable temperaments from breeding.

These observations should not be interpreted as proof that all earlier Boerboels had excellent temperaments or that modern dogs are necessarily less stable. They do, however, show that temperament was considered an essential part of breed preservation.

A powerful guarding dog must be confident and capable, but also manageable and dependable in everyday life.

For a breed originally developed to live and work alongside families, temperament cannot be treated as secondary to appearance.

Historical Colours and Changing Standards

Changes in accepted colours provide another interesting example of how the modern Boerboel has been defined through registration rules.

In his article The Piebald Boerboel, Lukas van der Merwe, one of the founding members of SABT, described piebald as one of the historical colours found in the breed.

He recalled piebald Boerboels being bred in the Free State, including dogs associated with Jaap van Niekerk, whose farms kept large numbers of sheep.

According to Van der Merwe, these dogs were valued for their ability to guard livestock. Their distinctive colouring was also considered useful because it made them easier to distinguish from predators at a distance.

The article includes observations attributed to Dr. P. Le S. Milstein, who described two regional populations of predominantly white Boerboels with large orange patches: one in the eastern Free State and another in the northwestern Transvaal.

Milstein reported that these dogs were locally regarded as normal Boerboels and were known for their good temperaments.

These accounts are particularly interesting when compared with later registration decisions.

Minutes from a SABT meeting held on 25 June 2005 record a decision to recognise yellow, brown and brindle as acceptable colours, while excluding black and piebald dogs from registration.

The existence of historical piebald populations and their later exclusion from a particular registry are not contradictory facts.

They demonstrate the difference between the characteristics found in the historical breeding population and those subsequently accepted by an organisation's breed standard.

A registration rule can determine which dogs are eligible for a particular registry. It cannot change which colours existed in the breed's past.

Different Organisations, Different Directions

As the Boerboel became more popular, different breed organisations developed their own standards, registration systems and breeding priorities.

These differences influenced which dogs were accepted, which characteristics were rewarded and how breeders interpreted the ideal Boerboel.

Historical SABT meeting minutes also show that decisions concerning size, colour, disqualification criteria and appraisal procedures continued to evolve.

For example, the June 2005 minutes record the committee's position that there should be no upper height limit for male Boerboels.

Such decisions are important when examining how the modern breed developed.

The Boerboel was not shaped by one unchanging standard. Its development involved different breeders, organisations and interpretations of what the breed should become.

Improvement or Change?

Every breed should benefit from responsible efforts to improve health, structural soundness and temperament.

However, improving a breed does not necessarily mean making it larger, heavier or more visually impressive.

The concerns expressed by Bezuidenhout and Milstein in 2002 remain relevant because they address a fundamental question: what should breed improvement actually achieve?

If a dog becomes less capable of performing the work for which its breed was developed, can that change really be considered an improvement?

The answer depends on what breeders choose to value.

There is nothing wrong with variation between individual Boerboels. The historical population itself was never completely uniform.

But there is a difference between natural variation within a functional breed and deliberately selecting for characteristics that compromise its original abilities.

Preserving What Matters

At Tuebor, we believe that understanding the Boerboel's history is essential to preserving its future.

We do not believe every old Boerboel was perfect, nor that modern breeding should simply reproduce the past.

Health, sound structure and stable temperament should always be improved wherever possible.

What we question is the idea that the Boerboel must become something fundamentally different to be considered better.

The original Boerboel was valued for its strength, versatility, movement, confidence and ability to live and work alongside people.

Those characteristics remain important to us.

The purpose of studying the breed's evolution is not to criticise individual breeders or their dogs, but to understand how breeding priorities have influenced the Boerboel over time.

Preserving a breed requires more than maintaining its name and registration documents.

It also requires remembering why the breed existed in the first place.

Historical Sources

• Bezuidenhout, Dr. Coen & Milstein, Dr. Peter. Pitfalls in Boerboel Improvement. HBSA Boerboel Bulletin, November 2002.
• Van der Merwe, Lukas. The Piebald Boerboel. Historical Boerboel Association of Southern Africa, publication date not established.
• South African Boerboel Breeders' Association (SABT). Minutes of Meeting Held on 25 June 2005.
• Swart, Johan. The Boerboel: A Revision of the Origins and History of the Breed (2020).