UKC Stand on Limited Registration - Page 1

I have another breed besides GSD'S and this was posted on their web site. I was wondering if this rule is current and/or does anyone here know about this ruling? Mel Letter from United Kennel Club: UKC Position Statement: Limited Registration Schemes and Spay/Neuter The United Kennel Club, established in 1898, is the world’s largest all-breed performance dog registry. While we recognize other registries, and share issues and concerns with registries around the world, our rules, regulations and guidelines are indeed our own and are designed around the UKC mission statement. One difference between the UKC and another American dog registry is a method ostensibly created to encourage breeders to handle stock that is - in the breeder’s opinion - not suitable for breeding. One dog registry has a system of registration that allows a breeder to sell puppies with a registration paper that prohibits its puppies from being registered with that registry. The United Kennel Club feels that this system is unenforceable, creates a false sense of security for the breeder, and is susceptible to abuse. The United Kennel Club does offer a Limited Privileges Listing, which allows dogs that are spayed or neutered to compete in some UKC events. This is not to be confused with a scheme in which the papers precede the spaying or neutering of the dog. A limited registration paper does nothing to ensure the puppy in question is ever spayed or neutered. The United Kennel Club believes that a registry has no place in attempting to legislate these matters and has no place in the br eeder’s whelping box. Instead, we encourage breeders to take responsibility for these matters by: 1) spaying or neutering any dog they feel is not suitable for breeding before they sell the puppy, 2) by entering into contract with the buyer that requires spaying and neutering at a determined interval or 3) by simply holding registration papers until furnished proof of spay/neuter. Additionally, we hope that those employing spay-neuter contracts, registration schemes or any other effort consider the whole dog, rather than conformation traits alone, for the criteria for such decisions. There are many reasons that a healthy, hardy dog with, for example, great, breed-specific hunting instincts could advance the breed even though the dog does not have the aesthetics to win in a dog show ring. In America, when a puppy buyer purchases a puppy, the puppy is theirs: they have every right to do with it what is allowable within the parameters of prevailing law. No dog registry owns a dog, a breed, or a breeder. Obviously, the UKC prefers any dog is bred responsibly and for the criteria outlined in our UKC Total Dog approach, an approach which includes but is not limited to breed conformation. It is our mission to create events and programs that showcase the Total Dog as a way to encourage such breeding. Proponents of a limited registration approach claim the registration certificate discourages the buyer from breeding the dog. Opponents claim that there is room for abuse by breeders who: 1) want to limit the market in their area of puppies that are registrable by a specific registry; 2) want to charge twice for the same puppy; or once to purchase the puppy, and a second time to reverse the limited status or 3) use it as leverage to persuade owners to put a performance title on the dog before releasing full privileges. continued-

part 2: The United Kennel Club, Inc. has no opinion of either side of any of these claims as we do not have such a registration scheme. We have no intent, however, of being part of such abuse. We feel that when a breeder chooses to advance their breed by creating puppies, they accept full responsibility while being aware of all of the uncertainties and uncontrollable issues associated with canine genetics and human behavior. Acknowledging some of the philosophical differences that exist between registries also may help in shedding light on the topic. The United Kennel Club has always and will always be a performance dog registry. While we proudly hold conformation events with a total dog emphasis, we are not driven by one specific event type. Other registries are indeed driven by conformation events. We have no argument with that fact and applaud the diversity among registries. Our mission, however, is not defined by striving to create show dogs only. With that said, placing limits on the offspring of a dog because it doesn’t meet certain conformation criteria is less likely to be a factor for those breeding for health, performance, trainability, or breed specific character – all of which are elements that advance a breed. For example, a breeder striving to produce a quality retriever would be pleased to have a responsible person buy a dog from them and breed the dog responsibly if the dog had a strong propensity to retrieve and excellent hips, even if it had conformation traits that made it undesirable for the show ring. There are many good reasons for a responsible breeder to spay or neuter a puppy (or enter a contract to do so) beyond conformation, especially health, instincts, structure, breed character and temperament appropriate for the breed. The whole dog, and the current state of a breed’s gene pool, must be considered. For those who think the UKC does not recognize limited registration schemes for monetary reasons should consider the following: the United Kennel Club routinely refuses registrations to AKC Registered dogs that have breed disqualifications. If the UKC was interested in increasing registration revenue, we would accept the tens of thousands of AKC registered dogs with disqualifying faults such as white Schnauzers, red Rottweilers, and silver Labradors. We encourage all breeders to consider the creation of a litter of puppies a major and sometimes daunting responsibility. Every puppy a breeder creates deserves a good home with responsible owners. We understand the inexact science of breeding and that the results can be less than desired. In cases where a puppy does not meet a breeder’s own personal criteria to advance the breed, we strongly encourage them to spay or neuter the puppy before selling it or to enter into a binding contract to do so and not to rely on a dog registry to implement this request.

four words "BRAVO for the UKC"

I know that many will want to castrate me for my opinion but I agree that if I buy a dog, I should be able to breed it if I want, regardless of what the breeder (former owner) desires. I paid for it. It's mine. I should be able to do as I please with my property as long as I don't abuse (torture, mistreat, neglect) it. What if Captain Max v Stephanitz had been told he could not breed Horand Grafath because the former owner did not think it was worthy of being bred? He would have started with another dog I am sure. Then what would we have today as our GSD? Something close I am sure, but not the same. There were pleny of dog breeds to go around at that time and several as capable as GSD's, to do the same work. Just making conversation :). P.S., after a lot of investigation, there is no doubt that wolf blood was used in the "making" of our beloved GSD breed. A lot of it in the beginning. Capt. Stephanitz states so in his book (original 1923 English edition). A few leaders in Germany of this breed think that it is time ,even today, to breed some fresh blood (outcross to another breed) into the GSD to help with the health problems associated with the breed. If I want to breed extra large GSD's, why should I not be able to breed and register extra large GSD's, using a puppy I bought from you? It's now my dog and it was my money that you took in payment.

Well, I've been slashed so many times it doesn't matter any more. I say good reasoning UKC, I agree 100%. Here in North America, both in Canada and the US, I have learned through experience that most of the show breeders do limited registration for the very reasons mentioned: To get paid twice and twice as much for the same dog and to maintain control of the dogs they sell, even though they sold them for good money to someone else. These reasons are what I abhor. If I buy a dog, I want it to be mine and I want to make the decisions about what I do with the dog. I am very responsible and would never do anything that was a detriment to the breed. It would be fine if breeders used this only for dogs that they consider should never be bred, those with serious faults that are bad for the breed, but nothing could be further from the truth. If a breeder wants control, then sell on co-ownership only with contract and all is up front. If a breeder sells a dog to someone, one hopes that they are selling to people they believe to be responsible and would not breed a dog with bad hips, health problems or not in the interest of the breed. But it is interesting that many of these same breeders do not follow their own rules!! Good on ya, UKC, in recognizing these most prevalent faults with the so-called "limited registration": 1) want to limit the market in their area of puppies that are registrable by a specific registry; 2) want to charge twice for the same puppy; or once to purchase the puppy, and a second time to reverse the limited status or (!!!!) 3) use it as leverage to persuade owners to put a performance title on the dog before releasing full privileges.

for me it is about the dogs and the overpopulation of ones that should not be used because they are not the total package and benefiting the breed as a whole! Needless to say I will be spay/ nuetering all pet quality pups in furture BEFORE they are placed in homes to keep this flagarant disregaurd and profiteering from happening to any pups I produce! They say they are about performance in a dogs total package yet require absolutly NO work titles before breeding? Sounds like a a registry set up for fun companionship animals to be registered and bred in complete disregaurd to conformation or work ethics in an animal for profit breedings for the household breeder IMO. With admitting uncaring position to conformation faults, and not requireing working titles before breeder even though they claim they are a working orintated registry, and even though they say health is more important than conformation they also DO NOT require genetic testing either!! It is worse than I originally thought when first read what the judges requirements entailed.

Just a question that popped up: SO, if you have AKC limited registration on your dog, and you go to wherever the UKC has jurisdiction and register that dog in their registry, does that now mean that dog can be bred, despite the limited registration status of the AKC registry? Wouldn't that make the AKC limited registration a complete farce if someone had the ability to move? Spaying or Neutering a PUPPY before being placed is not the answer, as that will cause other problems. Having an enforceable contract and knowing who your pups are being sold to, and having an ongoing relationship and friendship with the people who are taking the pups is, in my opinion, the answer.

true as long as they dont talk a good game till the time they change their mind about co oporating with their breeder. There is a person I am familiar with now doing this to the breeder she bought her pup from and i would not have expected her to do this either. Yes UKC will register an akc limted to full registration, and you need to adjust contracts to make penalties or dog reprosesion to account for this possibility for the person goiing back on who you thought they were and their word. The dog this person is going to breed has major disquilifications and should never enter a breeding program ever for any reason yet they are intent to do it all she can say is she loves her dog soooo much and now wants to have more like her!!!!! yet she claims she will not allow her puppy buyers to breed even though she is breaking her own contract!!!

You buy a puppy--it's yours. No ifs, ands or buts. I completely agree with Do Right and Redcap. Also, VonFelsenHof is correct about spaying and neutering too early--it's irresponsible (health and maturity wise). GSD breed wardens should make a judgment on a particular dog or bitch as to it's eligibility for AKC breeding rights. If the applicant isn't breed worthy, (health, conformation, etc.), then puppies can't be registered with AKC. An individual, American breeder shouldn't have that say alone---not if they're selling the puppy. Too many breeders today can't let go. They have to keep their fingers in the pie, so to speak. My opinion---The prices for puppies are getting ridiculous. (No need for those who think otherwise to challenge---we all know by now the replies--free market, costs in raising, stud fees, etc.) Another opinion---Co-ownership is a horror. Most people don't have a clue what they're getting into. (The only time I ever saw a feasible co-ownership on a website took place between Sue B. and the Shotaan kennel--breeder to breeder, not breeder to public.) So much greed. It's going to come back and bite the "control" breeders in the ass. Pretty soon, most people will become aware and take this nonsense to court. Breeders should just try and find the best people possible to sell to---people whose utmost concern will be the welfare of the individual dog as well as overall future of the breed.

I think comments like this one is the reason why people don't want to purchase a dog in the US from breeders with these absurd worded contracts. "you need to adjust contracts to make penalties or dog reprosesion to account for this possibility for the person goiing back on who you thought they were and their word" I personally would never purchase a dog where the contract says you can reposses my dog I paid you for, this is plain stupid. If you want to sell puppies and want to "control" the dog in question and require them to be altered before giving the registration. Then either keep the animal long enough to have it spayed/neutered OR with hold the paperwork until the new owner proves the dog has had the procedure. I like UKC as they have more shows so I can go compete more often sometimes every weekend. So all my dogs are double registered. Gabby