AKC to register dogs with " no" papers - Page 2

I don't normally post...just have fun reading but when I saw this post for AKC I had to jump in.What about this new registry "National Pedigree Certification Registry".I spent a few hours last night talking with the owner of this company.Seems like a great plan.He has alot of good goals.I have been offered a sales job with this company.I think this guy may really have something here.I have seen other companies try but this guy seems to be headed in a way that could work.

We have all said for years AKC was the only way but maybe things could change.

http://www.pedigreeregistry.com/

I will be looking into this one and let you all know as I know more about it.If anyone would like to look the site over and give me feed back I would love to know how some of you feel.

i thought the FCI did not recognize multi-breed registries?   akc is not a member of the fci.

john

I just went to the AKC website and could not find anything about it.  I just emailed one of my friends and asked her--maybe I missed it.  So if I get a link I will post it.

Isn't that "National Pedigree Certification Registry" the one that registers "Puggles" (pug/beagle mutts) and "Yorkipoo" etc??  not an improvment to the AKC.  The thing is that in the US it's ONLY a registry... a list of names with very very little energy put towards enforcment.  The SV has very strict regulations as to approved breedings, titles, # in litter and such... (or they used to if that's changed) The AKC doesn't get involved in anything like that.  The USA has a number of registries... UKC, ARF and I'm sure others. Again they are registries, not controling bodies of the breed such as the SV in Germany.

While limited registration is a tool that's an improvement to everything with papers being allowed to be bred, there's a lot of room within the AKC for more teeth... Like if any Dog sold from a Pet Store being automaticly on a limited registration... But I'm sure folks would bitch and lobby and get it shot down. Holding papers until a dog is spayed with a signed contract to prove the buyer is aware of that condition is still bout the best tool we have.  I just made the mistake of thinking that if it was on a Co-ownership my permission would have to be given before any pups could be registered from a female.

Windwalker:  buyer doesnt need your papers if you hold them , They under the new rules , can petition akc for new paperwork , saying never got it and akc will register the pup or dog...your  intent wouldnt work either. NOthing a breeder can do..Akc rules. You have no say so.

Of course, a lot of people, will not know about all this , for a while..Most people dont know what AKC does. They depend on us , the breeders to tell you how and when..But some people , curiously , call akc and make things plenty messed up...I corrected a signature and whited out my date because I wrote wrong number and the man called AKC when he got home. They told him on the phone,,oh no we wont accept a whited out application for anything....Wrong...I bet Ive made 200 corrections in the last 25 years on applications of my own dogs.  No one ever denied them and if they had a question you get  one of those letters.

So he called and hounded me..wanted a new application..Well ,I drove 100 miles and took him another application as I had the sister and was keeping her for a while and I gave him my application...THat is when I discovered my beloved pup tied to a pole in a field of high grass , at a Shack by the Railroad Track... You KNow the rest of the story.

soon, only millers will be able to breed, as they will be the only ones with enough financing and legal staff to accomplish it. The AKC is the only FCI registry for the US... you can't register in the UKC without first having an AKC regeistered dog. So no matter how much the AKC sucks, we're stuck with it.

My dog has no papers, so I've come to discover this. I knew it couldn't be registered when I got him. Having to mark 'mix' on his scorecard irked me, so I looked into it. The more I learn, the less I care whether he ever gets registered. The only registered dog I ever got has a severe overbite, so those papers aren't worth anything to anybody but the AKC that collected the fee to process them. Near as I can tell, that fee is all anyone cares about, which is why we find ourselves with so many health issues in so many breeds.

All they'd have to do is deny registering any dog until it was 2 yrs old, and passed a health check. Then you could see what you got, and know it is a healthy adult. That would simply make many of the health issues simply disappear. But they don't care about healthy breeds, only the fees.

Yes, greed sucks, and the dogs are deteriorating before our eyes.

IMO we really expect way too much from AKC by placing the responsibility of breeding better dogs on them rather than where it really belongs, on those doing the breedings in the first place. In the US AKC would get sued until they run out of money if they set up any rules regarding which dogs can and can't be bred other than requiring  a paperwork trail  that proves both parents are purebred and of the same breed in order to register the litter.  The SV has a much easier role in that respect as it seems those living in Germany and breeding GSD's are far less likely to initiate a lawsuit against them, they only regulate the breeding of one breed, and belonging to the SV is actually optional to any Germany citizen wanting to breed registered GSD's. My understanding is a German citizen can still breed any dogs they want, they just can't registered them with the SV, they need to use another registry.  Is that correct? AKC regulates many, many more breeds that the GSD and it would take a much larger staff to manage its business should they decide to monitor every breeding done in the US. That would take a lot more personnel and a lot more money coming from our pockets. The cost of registering a litter could increase many times over.

My biggest objection to giving AKC the power to regulate which dogs can and cannot be bred is that we already have enough nanny laws in the US that tell us what kind of dogs we can own,  how they must be kept, neutering laws, and so forth that I don't want AKC telling me which of my dogs I can breed or to whom. Who in AKC would be qualified to make those decisions? Be careful what  you wish for.....................the GSD world needs to figure out a way to try to do a better job policing its own rank and stop blaming the poor quality on AKC.  There are plenty of substandard and unhealthy dogs registered by the SV inspite of all their requirements. JMHO.

[quote]Time to start a new, more restrictive registry in America?[/quote]

From your fingertips top God's ears!  IMHO, that organization is all about politics and power trips! The AKC-CHF aint much better, either- when people on the board of the AKC-CHF vote to fund researchers who work under them, at their own universities, that just doesnt sit well with me. As one who peruses the AKC site often, and views the manner in which they operate, it makes me sick! Its a money making machine, period, end.