Thoughts on Limited Registration - Page 7

@ aaykay

Whats hard to understand is if your not breeding then theres no drama either way. The requirements would not effect you from most breeders so that does not make any sense where does the drama come from with rules that dont effect you? Resale maybe? Do you buy and sell the dogs trained I guess that would be an encumbrence. 

1) If cash and carry is your position for those reading this, should the AKC adopt any rules to help better the bred or should all rules be off the table in your opinion? Joanro, srfwheat, aaykay et al.

Susie, again I would expect those numbers to be drastically different as stated apple orange. I also would agree we have a much higher percentage of people who purchase with the expectation of breeding but again I see a rise in many places not just here. I would submit that while Germany owns the leading head titling as a country I would expect we own the working title with more employed here, those should not be discounted because of lack of title from any one organization.

Akc is only a registry...breed requirements are up to each breed club. How many breeds does akc keep registration records for? Do you realize how many personnel it would require to monitor every breed's qualifications for breeding ? Off the wall  to even suggest it.
Gigante, you are free to impose whatever restrictions you desire in your sales contract...akc only registers dogs.

Who or how is not really my point though, should there be any requirements for the mass on bred betterment.

That is the responsibility of every breeder. (I'm guessing that 'by the mass', you mean for the general dog owning public.)
Screening buyers is the first step. If things don't 'feel' right to me, I won't let a pup go to that individual. But people lie, they are dynamic and things change. I'm not interested in controlling people. But I can control who gets my pups and I can control the quality of what I'm producing. Don't breed crap if you don't want crap to be propagated.
As for 'cash and carry'....absolutely not from me. Look, i had ONE puppy for sale last year, that's it. I dont 'sell' puppies to whoever presents the 'cash', never have and never will. Akc cannot control who gets my pups, nor can any other organisation.

You impose limited reg to hopefully prevent buyers from breeding your progeny. But all they need to do is go with CKC ( and possibly UkC) if they want to sell 'registered 'pups.

Thats a no to be fair in a around about.... No bred requirement. ;)~ And yes general public.

A noble thought but crap propagates everywhere at some level. Some places much more then others that is the issue at hand.



 

That's true, but if requirements like sv has, and limited reg was the answer to breedable dogs, why is this discussion happening? Many sv dogs are crap and should no be bred, but they have their survey, titles, etc and yet the progeny is crap, many times. Over one hundred years of breed requirements and look at the state of affairs with the gsd today. Obviously, 'breed requirements' as imposed, have not worked to the extent the imposers thought they would...but look at the revenue produced!

Joanro, sure some SV dogs are crap, but even within crap you need to distinguish...
Believe me or not, there are dogs ( out of BOTH lines ) not able to go through IPO training, and for several others the breed survey is the stop of their "breeding career".
In case there would be no requirements these dogs could be used for breeding...( instead they are sold to other countries without requirements, and there they are used for breeding, funny, isn´t it ? )
No problem in your country, the dogs are not tested prior to breeding.

But, honestly, I don´t think the Americans are going to vote for SV rules - but what about health tests, teeth, testicles ?!?
Your country is X-times bigger than ours, there are X-times more breeders than over here, you could ask for BETTER requirements - ANY requirements would at least force potential breeders to think about their own goals in case of breeding.

I know that you breed good dogs, but mediocre dogs can pop up out of every line. Let´s only think about HD - you sell a puppy to a nice lady, this lady suddenly dies, and her daughter or son gets the dog. He or she decides to breed the dog without HD/ED rating, way too young, to another untested dog. They will get AKC pedigrees, and your kennel name is on the pedigree. I wouldn´t like it.

Ouch but true. To be clear I view those as mainly revenues sources as well, I certainly see them as they are. With the exploitable holes its down to the breeder now, I agree. Not arguing for any organization but pointing out an argument against limited as a rule, is an argument for no control. Thanks for having set and saying the obvious.

Not to inject line nonsense but the Werner Dalm system was quite effective and a huge highlight and should be excused from that timeline, but no plausible return to that style could be preformed at present.

I agree with you, Susie. As for my kennel name on it, how about the dogs from EU that are sold to these people, that could not get breed survey ? They get bred and that kennel name is on the papers of a dog not health tested. Like I said, I'm not interested in controlling people. There is no solution to unsavory people getting ahold of and breeding any dog they want without health testing. But this is where 'capitalism' comes in. People are free to buy what they want, money talks. Quality usually trumps junk.
BTW, I'm talking about gsd as a breed....people should forget for one moment the SL/WL controversy.

"... how about the dogs from EU that are sold to these people, that could not get breed survey ?"
Never tried to implement that European breeders are more ethical... - a honest breeder wouldn´t sell a dog of this kind as a breeding prospect, but as a pet. Money talks worldwide ...

but these washed out dogs don´t affect "our" breeding stock, and almost none of the offspring ever comes back later on...