releasing registration papers with rescue adoptions

[Lenajo]

I've had several dogs come into foster with registration papers. The breeding is puppy mill by truck, and the breeders don't want them back. However, prospective sport homes often aks to see the breeding on a available dogs who have papers. I'm not comfortable with doing this, because I feel it advertises a breeder who doesn't deserve it.

 

What are some of the other rescuers opinions? Do you file the papers in the rescue records, and insist the new owner use ILP? Or do you transfer them to the new owner once approved?

 

Thanks

[Guest pax]

If the animals are neutered it really doesn't matter much. I've drawn a line through the breeder's name where I could and handwritten in "Placed by Suchandsuch Rescue" and the date, then photocopied the page and given that out. The originals stay in the file on the dog that I keep. That way they have the family tree fwiw, but they can't DO much with it and it's obvious the breeder doesn't care cause the dog was placed by a rescue.

 

I've liked to have pedigrees sometimes because it's fun to use it to try to pick names, so that's one reason for liking to see it.

[Root Beer]

I think pax's idea is a good one. I wish I had papers on Dean for the simple reason that I'd love to know what his lineage is. I don't want another dog from his breeder.

 

Mickey, my former foster, had papers and it was cool to research his ancestors. I saw pictures of his grandparents on the web and it was just fun. Not everyone is interested in that sort of thing, but it's kind of a perk for those of us who are.

[Rosanne]

I'd say either let them see it (a photocopy with the breeder's name crossed out is a great idea) or don't tell them it's there at all.

Some of us are just subject to BURNING curiosity. If I had a rescue, who I knew had papers somewhere, I'd really REALLY want to know - just out of curiosity! If the dog is s/n then it's not like they need it to breed. The dog would have to be ILP'd anyway, wouldn't it?

[Journey]

While it may be "interesting" they can't do anything with them - so I don't even let them see them. It's just not worth it IMO (bring on way too much curiosity!). They have the dog, like him/her what else do they need. They can ILP w/o papers.

 

 

Karen

[MaryP]

I actually give them the papers and keep a copy because the dog is altered before it leaves rescue. So, the papers don't mean much other than to let them see the family tree. I don't, however, say anything about the dog having papers until after we have both agreed on the adoption. I don't want people seeking out a dog from me just because it has papers.

[jdarling]

Being that the dogs are speutered prior to being adopted out, I think it's a good thing when the rescue will spew the name of the "breeder" all over the place. If a "breeder" knew that if one of their pups ended in rescue, that their name would be dragged through the mud from here to Timbuktu, perhaps they would keep better tabs on their pups.

 

But then again ... I'm also the one with the very unpopular opinion that rescuing, in and of itself, is a safety net for "breeders" to continue popping out puppies without having to worry about the previous pups that didn't work out. In a perfect world, if all the pups that didn't work out got returned to their "breeders" instead of being helped out by rescue, it might make them stop to think about what they're doing when they see the number of "old" pups they still need to find new homes for.

 

(Please don't take this like I am getting down on rescue. I am a rescuer.)

 

Jodi

[Lenajo]

My experience is that if a dog turns out good in sport, that it wouldn't matter if come from the devil himself of breeders, via the pound and a horrible situation, if people know the lines....someone will go to that breeder to by a puppy. They won't care what happened to this dog at all.

 

I can't just release the papers with teh breeder name crossed out - because the kennel names and numbers behind the breeder tell even more.

 

The issue here is that the owner *did* sign the dog over legally, so I could transfer the dog to the new home and it would not have to be ILP. And it would be world team eligible...

[Guest TheRuffMuttGang]

For me it all depends on the situation surrounding the adoption. I've found that most people that come to me don't really care if a dog has papers or not and even if it does, they don't really care if they have them or not. I do have one ABCA reg'd dog here now that has an adoption pending with a person I seriously doubt doesn't give two craps about his lineage. If he were going to a home where I thought the adopters might be tempted to find his breeder, there's no way in heck I'd adopt to them at all.

[juliepoudrier]

Just a slightly different take: because one of my adoptees did come with papers (he was neutered, private adoption), I was able to see that he came from some well-known working breeding (he was one off, meaning that he appeared to be bakcyard bred, or at least I had never heard of the owners of his sire and dam, but *they* had gotten their dogs from someone well known as having good working dogs). When I shared that information with someone from who I'd gotten another rescue dog, that person encouraged me to try my dogs on stock. The rest is history. So here's a case where knowing the pedigree did have a good end result. Incidentally, many of my current dogs go back to those same lines, so the fact that the original rescue was something less than stellar at stockwork didn't preclude me from finding out that dogs from that breeder's lines suited me just fine! (Kind of the opposite of what's mentioned here regarding finding out the breeding because the dogs are *good* and then going back to the breeder.) (And I should add that this dog came available because of the death of the owner, so not really a throwaway in the sense of many rescue dogs. I'm sure the owner's widow never contacted the breeder about taking the dog back.)

 

Incidentally, the dog with the registration papers turned out not to be suitable for stockwork, whereas the rescue without papers turned out to be a pretty decent worker--at least good enough for a rank novice!

 

I think whether you hand out registration papers could be considered on a case-by-case basis. In Lenajo's case, if she feels that doing so would ultimately encourage others to go to that same breeder, then I think she's justified in not turning the papers over. In other cases, I really wouldn't see a problem. Or if you're concerned about giving too much information, perhaps you can just give a synopsis of the pedigree. Anyway, I don't think it has to be black or white--maybe go with your gut feeling?

 

J.

[MrSnappy]

But then again ... I'm also the one with the very unpopular opinion that rescuing, in and of itself, is a safety net for "breeders" to continue popping out puppies without having to worry about the previous pups that didn't work out. In a perfect world, if all the pups that didn't work out got returned to their "breeders" instead of being helped out by rescue, it might make them stop to think about what they're doing when they see the number of "old" pups they still need to find new homes for.

 

I think making that leap in 'logic' is like diving into a quarry at night. It's not very bright, and it's likely to hurt your head.

 

IMO, you can't apply "perfect world" scenarios to REAL LIFE events. That is to say, while in a perfect world there would be no such thing as shelters, no shitty breeders (no cancer, war, pedophiles or rapists too!) etc., we live in real life. And there are.

 

Rescues most certainly do not provide a safety net for anything other than the dogs. If a breeder doesn't give a flying -- anyway -- who buys his/her pups, whether they get altered, whether they are contributing to a much larger problem, whether they end up in a shelter or a rescue for that matter ... what makes you feel rescues provide anything except a place for those dogs to go? Those breeders don't care or need to worry about their previous pups because they don't. Period. Whether a rescue exists or not. Morality is not something you can mandate, teach or force. Do you think the breeder of Debbie's wee litter gives a poop that they ended up in a shelter and one of them died? Probably not - because she put them there, did she not? I hardly think that someone who would dump three teeny puppies in a shelter cares if there is a 'safety net' of rescuers out there looking out for her pups or not.

 

In the "perfect world scenario' you envision, rescuers would be obsolete (yay!) because there would be some kind of governing something-or-other that would force breeders to step up to their responsibilities in the fashion you describe. But this is not a perfect world scenario, so there aren't, and so there are rescues to look out for the dogs. Rescues don't provide a safety net to breeders - this would be true ONLY if such a responsibility-inducing mandate were in place and still rescuers came along and said "Don't worry, lousy breeder having many puppies returned, we'll take of those dogs for you." That'd be a safety net, IMO.

 

In my experience, the breeders who actually care take back their dogs - be it from the owner, the shelter where the chickenshit owner dumped it or the rescuer who ended up with it and contacted the breeder about it. The ones who don't care ... don't. And many of them don't to the degree that they really don't care if those pups end up in rescues, shelters, or burlap sacks in the river. As long as the cash is burning a hole in their pockets.

 

On the subject of papers, we almost never get in dogs with papers. In the few instances that I have, I have given the new owners the papers. Why not? They can find out who the breeder is anyway, because in Canada, all CBCA (and CKC ones for that matter) registered pups have to be tattooed with the breeder's information (I think they can be chipped instead of tattooed). And that information is available on a website maintained by the registry. As long as the dog is neutered, the papers do them no good whatsoever. However, since all dogs adopted under us are co-owned by the rescue, we also become co-register-owners of the dog when those papers are turned over.

 

 

RDM

[SoloRiver]

I think Wendy's fear is a valid one -- there are a lot of sport people who would happily buy a puppy from Satan if they thought it would grow up to be a winner.

 

On the other hand, as a responsible owner I personally like to know the breeding behind my dogs. In Solo's case, knowing his pedigree has led to some interesting insights into his personality, temperament, and working style. I would never ever go back to his breeder for another dog, but knowing what I do like about him and what I want to avoid, and what runs in what lines that he carries, might help me choose another dog -- from a good breeder -- in the future. I will be looking for another Solo for the rest of my life... any information that will help me do that is information that I want to have.

 

There are a lot of Border Collies out there whose papers are basically meaningless except to tell you that their breeders were very bad breeders, that carry no recognizable lines of any repute, and are interesting primarily as objects of curiosity. On the other hand -- and this is a problem that I've noticed is somewhat unique to this breed compared to other popular breeds -- it is quite common that fairly to extremely well-bred dogs land in rescue. Unfortunately, for reasons that I think are largely cultural in nature, working Border Collie breeders who are producing good dogs are often not as careful placing puppies as breeders in other breeds. They almost never use spay/neuter contracts -- I understand why, for a working home, but for a puppy going to a pet or sport home the circumstances are quite different. Many do not seem to think it is their responsibility to take back a puppy or dog at any time.

 

It is relatively easy for an unscrupulous person or a backyard breeder to get a hold of a nice puppy, grow it up, and start breeding it as much as he or she wants. In other breeds, breeders tend to guard the fort better, which is why the dogs in rescue are almost invariably from puppy mills or are of totally nondescript breeding. This is a long way of saying that the papers a rescue dog comes with might potentially contain interesting and useful information to a careful and knowledgeable adopter. Like Julie P, part of the reason I started working Solo in the first place is because with his breeding, there wasn't any reason to think he wouldn't be able to work, and a number of reasons to think he might be pretty good at it. If his papers had been full of "Rex XVIII" and "Fluffy Bunny III" then I might not have tried. I would have missed out on a lot of insights I've been able to make into Solo's background and nature, and Fly never would have happened. I've even been able to identify some of Solo's close relatives, which has been really cool (hi Deb!) because I know what dogs are behind him.

 

I don't know, it's a tough one.

[Lenajo]

The dog in question is a puppy mill by truck breeding for at least 4 generations. Unfortunately she has the qualities most sought by typical sport homes:

 

merle

fast

 

Her mere presence at an event as a trained dog is going to spark interest in her bloodlines. I do *not* want to give credit for a nice dog to these people...who advertise by the way on "puppy dog web". The only reason this dog is nice is pure dumb luck and a great breed-wide gene pool.

 

But I also want to get her a good home, preferably a competitive one where she can really stretch her talents. No papers = little chance of a major competitive home. They don't want ILP - ran into that before.

[SoloRiver]

The dog in question is a puppy mill by truck breeding for at least 4 generations.

 

Yeah, with papers like that I wouldn't bother releasing them. I don't know who "Ace 12345" or "Dude 67890" are, and neither does anyone else, so releasing the papers would do more harm than good.

 

There ARE serious sport people out there who do not care if a dog is registered. I would hold out for one of those homes. Either that, or I would sigh and place her in an active pet home. Better than than advertising a bad breeder.

[juliepoudrier]

Lenajo,

I agree with Melanie in this case. If you look long enough, you may find a good sport home that doesn't really care about pedigree. They must exist (although maybe that's only in RDM's perfect world ).

 

J.

[kelpiegirl]

For what it's worth, to compete in ALL USDAA events, pedigree does not matter. That includes world competitions. ILP's are only needed for ACK.

Julie

[Lenajo]

For what it's worth, to compete in ALL USDAA events, pedigree does not matter. That includes world competitions. ILP's are only needed for ACK.

Julie

 

in this region ACK is it, there is some USDAA and NADAC but very few do just that. Serious competitors want dogs that can be world team (ack registered only) - even if realistically the human part of the team will never make it

 

I'm not dumping the dog, but I'm really frustated that the first responses about her presence here was "what are her lines?" etc etc.

[kelpiegirl]

That really stinks.

Julie

 

in this region ACK is it, there is some USDAA and NADAC but very few do just that. Serious competitors want dogs that can be world team (ack registered only) - even if realistically the human part of the team will never make it

 

I'm not dumping the dog, but I'm really frustated that the first responses about her presence here was "what are her lines?" etc etc.

[Lenajo]

blame the FCI. In order to be world team the dog must be "purebred" with known pedigree and from the designated registry for the country - that's how I understand it anyway. No mutts, no mixes, no rare breed registries, no non-main kennel club registers, and no ILPs. Which is why you will never see a working sheepdog (non-kennel club Border Collie from the UK) there either. Despite the fact that they *rock* in UK agility.

[Eileen Stein]

I've deleted a post from this thread that was devoid of substantive comment, and contained only a slam against another poster. You know who you are. Please don't do this again -- if you want to disagree with what someone else says, keep it to the issues, not the personalities.

 

Carry on.

[jdarling]

Oops. That was me. Sorry, Eileen. I guess it was because I'm not very smart and my head hurts. Shame on me. My apologies to the poster.

 

I think making that leap in 'logic' is like diving into a quarry at night. It's not very bright, and it's likely to hurt your head.

[Olivia]

I think, maybe I'm wrong, that to make the AKC world team thing the dogs all have to be intact so no matter whether the dog is ILPed or fully registered, if it is neutered it isn't eligible.

 

Am I wrong?

 

Olivia

[Lenajo]

I think, maybe I'm wrong, that to make the AKC world team thing the dogs all have to be intact so no matter whether the dog is ILPed or fully registered, if it is neutered it isn't eligible.

 

Am I wrong?

 

Olivia

]]

 

To be ILPed a dog must be neutered/spayed

 

But that's not the issue. They can be n/s but they must be fully registered/known pedigree, which is not ILP

[Rosanne]

There are some decent agility competitors out there who do only USDAA/NADAC. I quit AKC myself, b/c it's just such a pain in the REAR Not to mention I didn't compete in it for a long time anyway because I have always disliked their philosophy. I got sucked in by the world team idea. But, see, USDAA has a world team now, too. And even though my boy has decided he won't be on it this year It's there and it's open to ALL dogs who compete for it.

 

It does seem to me that when I go south there are many more AKC-type people than up here in the Northeast. If I didn't live in a tiny one-bedroom basement with 3 BC's already I'd offer to maybe foster him up here and try to find him(her?) a home up here.

 

No, a dog does not need to be intact to be on the AKC Agility World Team, but yes, it does need to have a pedigree. Open-registered dogs who had ABCA pedigrees are eligible.

 

ETA: in the case of a dog who has no relatives anybody would recognize, I'd say stowe his pedigree and don't even tell potential adopters you have it. Say "he's from an irresponsible breeder" and leave it at that.

[SoloRiver]

You know, if she's a really nice dog you could just mail her to me and solve the whole problem right there.

 

Is she any good on sheep?