Fealomwen Edhel Posted February 27, 2003 Report Share Posted February 27, 2003 Hi! First off, I totally agree that the AKC is NOT a good thing for the BC. That said, as the BC isn't the only breed I'm interested in, what are the options for the 'Pleasure Breeds'? If you're interested in breeding Shih Tzus (which I'm not), do you have a different (as in, better) option for a registry - like an independent one-breed-only registry, like the BC has? Obviously that would depend on the breed, but what can be the advantages of one of these over the AKC? Disadvantages? What kind of things can these registries offer that the AKC doesn't/can't? And besides the puppymills issue and breeding away from working instinct, what reasons would you have to stay away from the AKC with a 'pleasure breed'? Thanks in advance. And sorry for bringing in a non-BC issue again, but again, this is the only place I know of to ask this kind of questions. Fealomwen Edhel and Alex the BCx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pam Wolf Posted February 27, 2003 Report Share Posted February 27, 2003 Here in the USA, anyone can start a registry--that has it's advantages and disadvantages. The puppymills have in fact started their own, complete with championship shows for all the dogs they breed, many of which are mixed breeds. Pam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoloRiver Posted February 27, 2003 Report Share Posted February 27, 2003 For breeds whose primary purpose is companionship, I actually think the AKC paradigm works fairly well. The only requirements of such a dog are that it look like the breed it is supposed to be and that it have an equable temperament suitable to be a casual pet. There are of course breeders within this paradigm who breed irresponsibly and breeds that are less healthy than others because of population-specific diseases and small gene pools, but if all you're looking for is a companion generally more than one breed will fit the bill (which is not the case with Border Collies, obviously), and you can choose a breeder whose breeding philosophy you prefer. There are a couple of toy breeds that have their own registries -- I think the Coton de Tulear is one (or is that Havanese, I can't remember -- something small and white and fluffy) but most go with AKC. In these dogs there is absolutely no reason to go to a breeder who breeds to an outside registry like the Continental Kennel Club. Most (if not all) AKC breed clubs have codes of ethics that establish guidelines for responsible breeding. Breeders who choose to register outside of AKC generally do so because they are not responsible breeders. I don't think AKC works very well for working dogs, and I don't like that it requires closed gene pools, but I don't think that it has the samne sort of deleterious effects on companion breeds that it does on working dogs. The Border Collie stands to lose a lot if the AKC gains hegemony over its breed community, but most companion-only breeds don't have the same things to lose, and if a dog is only going to be a casual pet, there are worse things to breed for than a pretty dog with an easy temperament. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dot me not Posted February 27, 2003 Report Share Posted February 27, 2003 "In these dogs there is absolutely no reason to go to a breeder who breeds to an outside registry like the Continental Kennel Club." My family members and I have between all of us 8 English Bulldogs. Not one of those are registered with the AKC. They are all either CKC or NKC. When we were looking for bulldogs we couldn't find a breeder with healthy pups for less than $1600. That was with a 3day health guarantee for communicable diseases and no guarantees on eyes, hips, soft pallette problems, etc. If they had a white puppy available it was generally $400-600 more(sigh). The only AKC people we found that put any guarantee with the pups were the one's selling "show quality" dogs and the price for those could easily go over $3K. After several weeks of looking we gave up on the AKC route and found 3 breeders with these other registries that I feel did a better job with their dogs. The prices ranged from $700-1000 but still with no long term health warranty. I have no interest in showing my bulldog so the registry just didn't matter to me. I wanted a healthy dog, which with a bulldog is a relative term. Every breeder I spoke with felt the same way. Why would I pay twice the price for the same quality dog and the same guarantee(or lack thereof). Our Rat Terriers are only registered with the United Kennel Club Int. The AKC does not yet recognize them and I am perfectly happy with that. All I need a registry to do is document the pedigree of my dog. It really doesn't matter to me if it's the AKC, CKC, NKC or UKCI. " Most (if not all) AKC breed clubs have codes of ethics that establish guidelines for responsible breeding. Breeders who choose to register outside of AKC generally do so because they are not responsible breeders. " I don't agree with this at all. Being a responsible breeder has absolutely nothing to do with AKC guidelines or codes of ethics. A breeder is going to follow their own personal ethics and I have yet to see a breed club influence their decisions. The border collie people are certainly not the only ones that have a beef with the AKC. Some have the option to walk away and go to another registry. Certainly, that doesn't mean that everyone who defects from "the evil empire" is an irresponsible breeder. And Lord knows, I've seen plenty of what I'd call puppy mills full of AKC registered stock. It's just important to remember that no matter which registry you choose a dog from, you MUST do your homework so you actually KNOW what you should be looking for. Then you have to be willing to walk away from a breeder that's not doing a decent job, no matter which registry they paper their dogs with. Lydia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoloRiver Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Well, I guess I feel that if you are going to choose a breed as rife with health problems as Bulldogs, it's a matter of choosing your poison. Puppy prices are also typically very high in that breed. What was it about the NKC and CKC (by CKC, do you mean Continental Kennel Club, or Canadian Kennel Club?) breeders that you felt was superior, other than price? I forgot to mention that the UKC, which is a reputable registry, is not in the same class as scam/mill registries such as NKC and ConKC. It's also typically much more performance-oriented than AKC and thus superior to it in many respects. Be that as it may, the basic duty of any registry is to maintain an accurate record of breeding animals. While registries like AKC, UKC, and yes, ABCA do this to a better or worse extent (all of them rely on the honesty of breeders in filling out paperwork, although AKC is instituting some limited DNA testing), registries like NKC and ConKC don't even make that pretense. Breeders who go with one of the new, "no questions asked" registries generally do so because they've either had their AKC/UKC registration privileges revoked or other, more nefarious reasons. NKC and ConKC are popular with millers and BYBs who sell to pet stores, because many ignorant pet store customers believe that a dog must have "papers" to be of value and they don't know that all registries are not created equal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dot me not Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 "Well, I guess I feel that if you are going to choose a breed as rife with health problems as Bulldogs, it's a matter of choosing your poison. Puppy prices are also typically very high in that breed. " You really said a mouthful there!LOL One of the Vets I worked for says that Bulldogs are a living textbook of genetic anomolies. You won't get an argument from me there! That's why we looked so carefully and for so long before actually buying. "What was it about the NKC and CKC (by CKC, do you mean Continental Kennel Club, or Canadian Kennel Club?) breeders that you felt was superior, other than price?" Ours are with the Continental KC, and the NKC. Every AKC breeder I spoke with really looked down their noses at the folks using the other registries. None of them could give me a clear reason except to say something derogatory like "those registries will take ANYTHING". What they wouldn't say is that many of the dogs in the other registries are dual registered with the AKC as well. Lexi's sire is one such dog. I don't have anything against the AKC Bulldog breeders. I just can't justify paying almost twice the price for the same quality dog. It's not that the NKC or CKC breeders had superior stock, it's just that the quality of their pups were equal to the AKC breeders I looked at and it seems they pretty much all have the same 3day guarantee with no long term health guarantee. So all things being equal there was no reason to spend the extra money. Now if I was still into showing it might have been a different story, but I just don't have the desire to show dogs anymore. At the particular time we were looking for dogs it just so happened that the breeders we felt did the best job were all from CKC or NKC registries. The woman that bred Lexi does an outstanding job with her dogs, certainly as good as any show breeder I've seen. I know there are nice AKC breeders out there as well, and maybe there are some that don't ask twice the price for the same dog, but I couldn't find them and I searched in 3 states and on the internet. "Breeders who go with one of the new, "no questions asked" registries generally do so because they've either had their AKC/UKC registration privileges revoked or other, more nefarious reasons. NKC and ConKC are popular with millers and BYBs who sell to pet stores, because many ignorant pet store customers believe that a dog must have "papers" to be of value and they don't know that all registries are not created equal." Well, I haven't seen any proof of this. But I do know of one fellow just a few miles from me that raises cockers and has a standing offer from a pet store 2 counties away to take ALL the cocker puppies he can produce. Every dog he has is registered with the AKC. I'll say again that the ethics/morals/actions of a given breeder have NOTHING to do with the club their stock is registered with. Lydia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fealomwen Edhel Posted February 28, 2003 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Hi! Thanks for the responses. It's interesting hearing others' opinions on this kind of thing. What I'm really trying to ask is, if you were going to try breeding pleasure dogs, which registry would you pick, and why? I totally understand most BC people aren't that interested in breeding non-working dogs, and honestly I probably wouldn't do it either till I'm too old to keep a BC (that may be a long way off, as I'm currently 16 ). Also, this is a bit of a personal 'policy issue' for myself. Before I started coming here a few months ago, I had only known AKC people. I had met one person who disliked the AKC - but she also cussed out my mom for paying the rent instead of spaying our sheltie (who, by the way, was closely watched and never had any chance of breeding). So, I was a little shocked coming here, but I stuck around and read, and I'm now very glad I did so. I know an AKC Golden Retriever breeder who breeds some really nice dogs - if you are looking for a nice pet, maybe agility or obedience dog. She shows 'four ring' (obedience, agility, field, and conformation), gives training classes to people from miles around, and has satisfied puppy buyers from her few litters. She currently has 9 dogs (including rescues, her own dogs, and her retired dogs), and usually has something like 4 additional dogs that she is fostering (she specializes in behavior problems with her training, and often ends up with the 'problem' rescues, which she will foster for years, if need be). She spends hours a day with her animals, and runs a business out of her home so she can stay home with them. I've spent as long as 5 days with her, and I think I can say with some certainty that she is dedicated to her dogs, to rescue efforts, and to keeping the breed what, in her opinion, it should be. Her opinion of the breed is that it should be a breed that, with proper training, can hang around the house, do some training and competing with the kids, and go hunt some duck or pheasant once or twice a year with Dad - and her dogs live up to that, to a T. She also breeds for health first, temparament second, and anything else third. I've also known (although not as well) the, to put it one way, 'villanous AKC breeder' - you know, the breeders who breed only for that top ribbon, or a few extra dollars, with no regard for anything else. I also agree that you can, and will, find both types in every registry. So, what I'm wondering is not so much 'what registry do I buy from?' as 'if I ever choose to breed a non-working breed, what registry do I breed with?'. So, thanks again for your replies - looking forward to more! Fealomwen Edhel and Alex the BCx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dot me not Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Well, as you'll often hear on this board, it depends.... From strictly a breeder's standpoint, I'd have to say the AKC would offer more advantages. It's the instantly recognizable "name brand" registry. They do offer a lot of options as far as competition goes and in general the AKC pups will fetch more money than the same quality dog from another registry. I offer my own experience in searching for bulldogs as an example of this. As a puppy purchaser as long as I have no interest in showing or other competition (we're talking strictly pet/lap dog here) then I'm going to go with a breeder that is concientious and produces nice quality dogs that look like their breed and have good minds and health. In that case, I don't care at all which registry a dog is papered with. I want a good dog, and papers don't make a good dog. Lydia And Inci, After that kind of money put out we're all too broke to buy real estate even with the leg piddlin' pooches tossed in! I tell you, it was awful trying to find healthy bulldogs. We all got an education really fast. They come from a different world than real dogs, but still we love 'em. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoloRiver Posted March 1, 2003 Report Share Posted March 1, 2003 As a puppy purchaser as long as I have no interest in showing or other competition (we're talking strictly pet/lap dog here) then I'm going to go with a breeder that is concientious and produces nice quality dogs that look like their breed and have good minds and health. In that case, I don't care at all which registry a dog is papered with. I want a good dog, and papers don't make a good dog. Well, of course they don't. But I'm a little bit confused. You said that the breeder you ended up going to was basically equivalent to the crappy AKC breeder you looked at, except that they wanted less money. You also said that there were better AKC breeders, who offered better health guarantees and presumbly were more concerned about the soundness of their animals (although "sound Bulldog" still sounds like an oxymoron to me), but that their puppies were just too expensive. I really feel that bargain hunting is not a great strategy when buying a puppy, and that if all you really require is a nice companion that may or may not be healthy and up-front cost is a concern, rescue is the way to go. We all know that AKC papers are no guarantee of quality (for that matter, neither are ABCA papers) and that there are plenty (PLENTY) of crappy AKC breeders. But it is also the case that for the non-utilitarian breeds (which is to say, almost all of them -- I don't know what you'd call them -- companion breeds? luxury breeds?), the best breeders as a rule register with AKC, in part because it is the registry of choice. Some excellent breeders will register with UKC. I prefer UKC to AKC by a long shot in many aspects, but AKC is more popular. Unlike AKC, most of the newer registries simply issue papers -- nothing more, no questions asked. They are business enterprises designed to exploit the fact that Joe Shmo puppy buyer thinks his puppy has to have "papers" to be a good dog. Their markets are puppy mills and BYBs. They will issue registration papers for Cockapoos and Schnoodles and other non-breeds. In general, although there are always exceptions (I guess), the fact that a breeder is registering with one of these new or scam registries should raise red flags. All I need a registry to do is document the pedigree of my dog. It really doesn't matter to me if it's the AKC, CKC, NKC or UKCI. Well, this is a bit of a problem. See, those other registries don't even keep studbooks. Everyone should know by now that I have no great love for the AKC -- but at least they do that. An AKC (or UKC) registered dog is identified by a number that ties it to a traceable genealogy. A dog registered with a scam registry only has a number. So, if a pedigree matters to you (in this context, I'm not sure why it does), you're not going to get what you want from a registry like the Continental Kennel Club. I could invent a pedigree out of whole cloth, attach it to Solo, call him a Technicolor Whifflehound, and they'd take my money and register him and mail me the papers. I know we all hate the AKC here and for good reason, but let's not let this hatred blind us to the fact that there are other evils out there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dot me not Posted March 1, 2003 Report Share Posted March 1, 2003 You said that the breeder you ended up going to was basically equivalent to the crappy AKC breeder you looked at, except that they wanted less money. No, Melanie, I didn't. I didn't say anything about an AKC breeder being crappy. I said their dogs were pretty much equal but the CKC/NKC breeders were asking approx. half what the AKC breeders were. I also said that the CKC/NKC breeders I found did a better job with their dogs. This means the facilities were clean, dogs were well socialized, Vet records were readily available etc. You also said that there were better AKC breeders, who offered better health guarantees and presumbly were more concerned about the soundness of their animals (although "sound Bulldog" still sounds like an oxymoron to me), but that their puppies were just too expensive. Again, I did not. I said the only AKC breeders that offered a long term health guarantee were the ones offering "show quality" pups and the price could easily go to $3K or more. I don't want to show bulldogs so why on earth would I just go fork out 3grand on something I don't want or need? Perhaps just to boycott a couple of registries that I have nothing against? Also, I didn't presume anything about their concern for the soundness of their pups. Asking more money for a pup has nothing to do with your concern for their welfare. I really feel that bargain hunting is not a great strategy when buying a puppy, and that if all you really require is a nice companion that may or may not be healthy and up-front cost is a concern, rescue is the way to go Let me make it perfectly clear to you, Melanie, I/we were not "bargain hunting". But none of us fell off the turnip truck yesterday, either. We did our homework and looked for weeks before finding breeders we were satisfied with, and our criteria were pretty tough. They happened to be CKC/NKC breeders. If that bothers you, then that is certainly your problem, not mine. Well, this is a bit of a problem. See, those other registries don't even keep studbooks. Everyone should know by now that I have no great love for the AKC -- but at least they do that. An AKC (or UKC) registered dog is identified by a number that ties it to a traceable genealogy. A dog registered with a scam registry only has a number. So, if a pedigree matters to you (in this context, I'm not sure why it does), you're not going to get what you want from a registry like the Continental Kennel Club. I could invent a pedigree out of whole cloth, attach it to Solo, call him a Technicolor Whifflehound, and they'd take my money and register him and mail me the papers. Well, again, I must disagree. I got exactly what I wanted. The pedigree and ownership history is all there in black and white. Well let's see here, I have 4 generations of pedigree listed right here on Lexi's certificate and it says on the same certificate that Lexi is registered in the Stud Files of the NKC. Every dog has a number and is "tied to a traceable geneology". They don't call it a "stud book" but rather a "stud file" but it's all documented right here. I can also pay for a 3,4, or 6 generation pedigree if I choose. So obviously, they're doing more than giving dogs numbers. I don't have a problem with the way they keep their records. I could invent a pedigree out of whole cloth, attach it to Solo, call him a Technicolor Whifflehound, and they'd take my money and register him and mail me the papers. Well, if a Technicolor Whifflehound is a recognized breed with one of these registries then I suppose you could do just that. But who'd be running the "scam" there? Lydia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.