by beetree on 28 October 2018 - 21:10
This idea is credited as an American construct introduced by the AKC. The idea was to encourage buyers who aspired to be breeders of note and the breeders they purchased from to be able to establish a way to measure their breeding outcomes when being compared against the upholding of the breed standard through show venues.
The question is—does LR work as intended and/or if there are instead, unintended consequences?
by beetree on 28 October 2018 - 22:10
There are so many breeders and dogs available that finding the choice that fits isn’t that hard if one also possesses patience.
by joanro on 28 October 2018 - 23:10
Good question, bee.
I will say that if I cannot trust the buyer of my pup to do health checks and determine if the dog is sound enough ( not just sound body but also temperament, nerves etc) then I won't sell to them.
Most people who buy pups from me are not interested in breeding dogs. They get them to be family members and live with the family...most have small children and don't have the time nor inclination to be bothered with breeding dogs.
When someone calls and tells me they want a female pup to breed for suplimental income, I suggest they buy elsewhere.
But full registration goes with all my puppies, no strings attached...same way I buy my pups.
In fact, I register all my puppies along with microchiped which I also pre-register.
All I need to do is fill out the new owner name on back of full registration and sign it over to them.
Doing this assures that ALL my puppies get registered and microchip is registered because aften times people will put the " puppy registration" in a drawer someplace, never to be looked at again. Limited registration does not stop determined, unscrupulous persons from breeding the dog anyway....a picture to show the dog is gsd or whatever breed, and CKC registration can be bought. Or, as I've said elsewhere, there are hundreds of adds for pups "with out papers" for sale.
by Rik on 28 October 2018 - 23:10
many years ago, I attended a "cat" show. and it was a very large one with almost every imaginable breed of cat. some very beautiful animals.
to the very last breeder/exhibitor there, and there were several hundred, none would sell a kitten without spay/neuter agreement for registration papers or else the price was several times multiplied. and I'm talking about starting at $500.00 for the neuter animal.
this was all to keep new people from showing up in a couple of years and driving down prices. these people were so tight and clanish, that it worked, very well. not sure about now.
in my opinion, LR on AKC is an attempt to do the same thing. it won't work on GSD in the USA because there are just so many. it does however work for breeders of some less popular breeds.
interested in hearing "the rest of the story"
by Vito Andolini on 29 October 2018 - 01:10
I have never bought a puppy with limited registration, nor has that even been an option. If I wasn't going to breed, I don't think I would care. I'm not a breeder, but if I was, how do I weed out the bad people? Unless I'm selling to everyone I know or well known trainers, what type of background check do I run? If I'm mainly selling to families that just want a pet, how do I truly know anything? Many people are with each other for years, get married, and things change, people cheat, etc. These are people we live with. Not random people that want a family dog. And these people are the worst culprit. They bring little Maxx home, post pictures all over Facebook, Snapchat, Twitter, etc. because this is the greatest puppy in the whole world. Friends and family tell them how adorable they are and they wish they were so lucky. Next, Judy is telling Tom that they are the luckiest family in all of Spring Meadows, and they want everyone else to be just as happy. Little Thomas Jr. And Olivia are all excited now, because they get to play with puppies.
Nope. Frankly, Bee, I'm not against LR if it helps the breed, but I've always been a Full Registration type of guy. I don't think I'd have a problem with LR if I didn't plan on breeding, etc. If I were to breed, it would be to breed the best specimen I could. To be a working dog that is worked. Whether that is sport, police, S&R, agility, etc. I know this is going to sound bad, and all the "German Shepherds are family dogs" people will come out if the woodwork, but I don't see the point in breeding a German Shepherd if it isn't going to go into a home where it is worked, where it excels at that work. Don't take this the wrong way. I think this can still be a part of the family, but a well bred GS isn't the easiest dog to live with if you are an inexperienced, busy family. I'd just hang it up if my intentions were to breed mainly family pets. The world has enough of them. They're called Golden Retrievers. The GSD is a working dog and that is what should be bred. So if I can't get those pups into homes where I know they're being worked, registration is the least of my worries. Now, if I have the demand from working people that I know are going to work the dog, they can have all the registration they want. Someone that is a known trainer doesn't guarantee anything, but I'd be more inclined to do the LR with the family dog route. Besides, they'll probably re-home the dog because,
"We had a baby, and the hair!"
"He growls at me when I want to get in bed"
"Just didn't have time"
"He's too hyper!"
"He poops too much"
by 1Ruger1 on 29 October 2018 - 01:10
I did appreciate this post by Prager from the other thread regarding “limited registration”
“it is not helpful to compare SV and AKC LR because one is mandatory - thus it may work, while other is voluntary and as such it could be misused for personal reasons. While I agree with Ruger that LR could be a good thing, that is if it would work as intended which would be to curb dogs which are not meant to be bred. But, I do not think generally this idea ended up to work the way it was intended that is as a protection of the GSD from idiot breeders. Meaning the reason people issue LR is not to preserve the breed but because most issuers of LE think that they have something special and do not want other people to have it. Thus, in other words, issuers of LR, for most ( not all) parts, it is a business - anti-competition - decision rather than decision based on "preserving of GSD quality ". Thus that way it may actually work against the GSD breed quality. That is if someone has something special then they should love their breed so much that they would allow others to breed it and thust hey would promote such quality.
Personally, when I am selling a pup, I ask people if they want to breed the pup. If they say yes then I ask them to send me the pedigree of the dog they want to breed and then I see if such dog should be bred - like hips record and so on and to and then I match such pedigree with the correct pedigree of a pup I am selling them. If their dog is not suitable for breeding and they want to breed anyway then I'll offer them to buy matched pair. Personally, I am confident in our pups that I am not concerned with competition. Most are copying us at best. I have realized that because you can not keep the man down if he has a strong desire to do something, thus I am here to help them do the right thing. If I would tell them that I will sell them pup only with LR or not sell them a pup at all then such a person is going to go somewhere else and breed anyway - probably some lesser dog then if he would use my recommendation.
If we would use SV mandatory rules and all dogs would have to pass certain tests in order to get breeders to do the right thing by the GSD then that would be a different story. But then the question is who decides what are are going to be the rules. I think SV rules suck and because they are mandatory they are directly leading to a destruction of the breed.
My solution: let public vote with their dollar.
For that, my solution would be to have a private organization who would evaluate dogs. This evaluation of dogs would be voluntary but breeders would like to have such evaluation because it would attest to certain quality their dog has..
This would be a test of suitability for breeding same as SchH was in the early days. No point would be awarded only pass don't pass. The dogs would be tested in the performance which would stem out of GSDs standard.
Dogs who passed such a test would be a desirable parent of the pups which one is buying. Dogs who would not pass would not be desirable parents. Public then would vote with their dollar for the pups from parents who passed the test.
Ehhhh Maybe I am naive....”
by 1Ruger1 on 29 October 2018 - 01:10
My question to Prager..
“I have realized that because you can not keep the man down if he has a strong desire to do something, thus I am here to help them do it”
Prager I can respect your solution to the very real reality of “you can’t keep the man down” because essentially people are going to find a way to do what they want regardless of what is best or most appropriate. So offering your assistance with that endeavor could be a solution.
And if you have the ability to assist your buyers that way that’s wonderful, but I’m betting that most want to go about things on their own so it’s not always a sure way for you to control your buyers aren’t breeding indiscriminately the dogs they buy from you.
That is why if I were a breeder I could not imagine selling a puppy with full registration until it has proven itself by the standards put into place to be breed worthy.
I don’t see a down side to that in anyway if they goal of the seller and the buyer is to adhere to that standard for the betterment of the breed.
Which leads me to my question.
“I think SV rules suck and because they are mandatory they are directly leading to a destruction of the breed. “
I am not sure what you mean by this statement. Would you mind elaborating a bit more as to why you feel the SV rules suck and why you feel they are leading to the destruction of the breed.
by joanro on 29 October 2018 - 02:10
Vito, a gsd family dog is also worked in protection and obedience.
The purpose of my gsd " family dog" is to be protector of the home...to be guardian. I don't sell my pups to people who want a couch potato to show off to the neighbors.
Here's a couple pictures of a female that came from one of my litters...after she worked over an intruder...this dog is representative of my " family dogs".
The guy was behind the owner, as the owner opened the door to let her out of the house when he got home one evening....she came through the door and lept past her owner, nailing the intruder in the stomach...
she held on while the guy was mashing her against the security fence trying to make her let go.
All the blood is from the intruder, the dog was not injured....
She is super with the child who has grown up with this dog. She has been trained in drug detection, but family protection is her main job!
btw, she sleeps in her owner's bed...a real family dog who takes her job seriously.
by astrovan2487 on 29 October 2018 - 02:10
by joanro on 29 October 2018 - 02:10
Astro, and how would limited registration have made a difference?
The purpose of AKC doing limited registration was for breeders to be able to register pups that were not breed worthy, or that would be disqualified in the breed ring. Therefore, dogs with limited registration are not eligible to be shown in the breed ring, but can participate in AKC events such as obedience or agility.
It was not for putting stipulations on buyers to title dog before the breeder would have the limited restriction lifted.
Many unscrupulous breeders have taken advantage of the full registration vs limited registration to get more money from buyers if they want full....kind of shady imo.
You must be logged in to reply to posts