Puppy Forum and Dog Forums banner

1 - 20 of 57 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Maybe AKC doesn't support cross breeding, but I am appauled at the fact that there are some breeders out there actively involved in 'local' kennel clubs... who show at AKC shows but yet still insist on advertsing designer breeds for sale. I was appauled that a member of the local Kennel Club breeds and shows Shih Tzu & Havanese and also sells Shih Tzu X Havanese puppies on a regular basis!!!!! And the AKC has no jurisdiction over these breeders.

I guess I am still trying to comprehend the fact tha AKC is only a registery and obviously have no code of ethics. And if they do, they are not abided by particuarly well. I looked up the code of ethics but couldn't find anything much that protects actual breeds or dogs in general.

:doh: I know this may seem naive, but I have only been in the USA for a couple years and I still am having major difficulty understanding how the biggest registry can operate this way.

The Australian National Kennel Club (ANKC)... whilst they have their problems... is a membership registry which promotes responsible ownership, breeding practices etc... Surely if the AKC were run in a similar manner and required annual membership like a breed club, would then be required to have a code of ethics similar to the ANKC which enforce rules with breeding, no cross breeding, no breeding unregistered dogs, prospective breeders must pass an open book exam before breeding a litter and registering puppies... prospective breeders must be a member for a minimum of 12 months before taking the exam....

Surely the AKC indirectly is also contributing to the puppy mills and the indiscriminate breeders, the so many that are making a salary out of selling puppies, designer breeds, etc.

This is the ANKC code of ethics... covers everything from conduct to age dogs are bred and how many times they can be bred. And if members don't abide by the rules and they are suspended or permanently banned from the association.

You may say that the puppy farmers are just not going to register their dogs with the ANKC because there are too many rules to abide by... this is true... but gradually the ANKC and it's members are educating the general public on where to purchase puppies (as ANKC breeders are forbidden to sell to pet stores) and more people are wanting puppies that are registered with papers, mostly pets that are registered on limited register.... so in turn it is helping to put the puppy mills out of business. Of course there are always going to be a minority unscrupulous breeders, even within the ANKC, but they don't last long as they are suspended when they don't follow the rules.

Here is a list of ANKC code of ethics... I realise that the breed clubs here have this in place, but the puppy mills are not going to be members of the breed clubs... I just don't understand why the AKC is run the way it is, apart from all the money the AKC gets from these breeders who breed for profit and not for the welfare of the dog. It would make so much more sense to run it as a membership/registery where the lost revenue from the puppy farmers, would be made up with the majority of memberships from responsible breeders, show exhibitors and the like.

ational Code of Ethics

Amended November 1996
Amended May 1998
Amended October 2000
Amended October 2001
Amended May 2005
Amended October 2007
Amended June 2008
Amended October 2008
Amended EAP July 2011


Each member, upon being elected or re elected to membership of a Member Body of the ANKC Ltd
shall be bound by the ANKC Ltd Code of Practice subject to each States relevant legislation.

Ethics

1.
A member shall not knowingly or recklessly misrepresent the ANKC Ltd or the member’s
Member Body.
2.
A member shall not engage in any behaviour that is contrary to the standards accepted by the
community.
3.
A member shall display good sportsmanship and conduct at all times so as to reflect credit
upon themselves, the ANKC Ltd and the member’s Member Body.
4.
Members shall constantly strive to improve their knowledge of their chosen breed or breeds,
and their knowledge of the requirements for the care, welfare and betterment of dogs.
5.
Members shall ensure that all dogs under their control are properly controlled, housed, fed,
watered, exercised and receive veterinary care as required.
6.
A member who leaves a dog owned by them in the care of another person shall remain
ultimately responsible for that dog.
7.
A member shall take all appropriate lawful measures to assist a dog in distress.
8.
A member shall positively enhance the reputation of dog breeders and owners by ensuring
that dogs owned by the member are not a danger or nuisance to the community.
9.
A member shall not participate in nor support any activity in that involves cruelty or damage to
animals, excluding legal hunting activities.
10.
A member shall not dispose of dogs owned or bred by the member to a pound or animal
refuge.
Breeding

11.
A member shall breed primarily for the purpose of improving the quality and / or working
ability of the breed in accordance with the breed standard, and not specifically for the pet or
commercial market.

12.
A member shall not breed with a bitch unless the bitch has reached adequate maturity for that
breed as determined by the member’s Member Body.
13.
A member shall not breed a bitch (except under extenuating circumstances) causing it to
whelp more than twice in eighteen months without the prior approval of the member’s
Member Body.
14.
A member shall not breed a bitch (except under extenuating circumstances) causing it to
whelp more than six times without prior veterinary certification of fitness for further breeding,
and without prior approval of the member’s Member Body.
15.
A member shall not permit any of that member’s pure bred dogs to be mated to a dog of a
different breed, to a cross bred dog, to an unregistered dog of the same breed, or to a dog not
on the Main Register without the prior approval of the member’s Member Body.
16.
A member shall take responsible action to reduce the incidence of hereditary diseases in
accordance with the ANKC Ltd Code of Practice for Hereditary Diseases.
17.
A member shall not, within Australia, sell or otherwise transfer from that member’s care any
puppy under eight [8] weeks of age without the approval of the member’s Member Body.
18.
A member shall not export a puppy under the age of eleven [11] weeks, or such greater age
permitted under the livestock import requirements of the country to which the puppy is being
exported.
19.
A member shall not knowingly sell a dog to any person residing in an overseas country known
to be involved in the utilisation of dogs for the meat trade without first satisfying the member’s
Member Body that the purchaser is a member of an ANKC Ltd recognised canine controlling
body in the overseas country. The member and purchaser must further acknowledge in
writing to the member’s Member Body that the intention of the sale is for the improvement of
the quality of that breed in the overseas country, and not for any other purpose.
20.
A member shall ensure that persons acquiring dogs from that member understand the
requirements for the care, welfare and responsible ownership of the dog, and that they have
the time and facilities, e.g. adequate fences, sufficient room and proper shelter, to fulfil their
responsibilities.
21.
A breeder shall be expected to maintain reasonable contact with the purchasers of dogs from
that breeder and to offer continued advice and reasonable assistance.
22.
A member shall register all puppies bred (excluding those breeds listed in ANKC Ltd
Regulation Part 6, Section 6.2 whose specific colours precludes them from being registered
on any Register) by that member that are living at the date of registration. Such registration
must include all puppies from the litter on the one litter registration application form and must
be applied for within eighteen [18] months of the date of whelping. (6/08)
23.
A member shall provide to all recipients of dogs sold or otherwise disposed of by that
member, written details of:
.1

The breed characteristics;

.2

Vaccination record and / or requirements;

.3

Responsible dog ownership information; and

.4

All documentation required by the member’s Member Body.

24.
A member shall not incorrectly describe nor knowingly misrepresent the characteristics of a
breed.

25.
A member shall ensure that all dogs sold or disposed or by that member are in the best
possible state of health. Where a dog with a health issue or disability is disposed of the
member must obtain from the recipient written and signed acknowledgement of the condition
of the dog.
26.
A member shall not:
.1

Sell or dispose of a dog to a commercial pet wholesaler or retail pet shop unless they
are accredited by the Pet Industry Association of Australia Limited (PIAA).There are no pet stores that are accredited and I doubt ever will be

.2

Allow a dog owned by that member to be given as a prize or donation or to be
auctioned.

General

27.
A member shall not conduct or permit mother / son, father / daughter or brother / sister
matings. The member is fully aware that puppies as a result of such matings will not be
registered without first gaining approval from the Member Body for the mating for scientifically
proven welfare or veterinary reasons. (Added EAP 07/11)
28.
A member who provides or makes available a dog for use in a film, advertisement, promotion,
or any media or public display must ensure that:
.1
The dog is portrayed in a manner consistent with its breed characteristics and
temperament as described in the Standard for that breed; and

.2
The dog is presented in a manner that is unlikely to create a negative reaction to
dogs generally or that breed in particular and that if there is any likelihood of a
negative impression, this is at the same time corrected through the development of a
story line that presents the dog or breed in a balanced manner.

29.
A member shall not indulge in false or misleading advertising relating to the conformation,
characteristics or performance of that member’s dog.
30.
A member shall not misrepresent nor malign the conformation, characteristics or performance
of another member’s dog.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,406 Posts
I don't think that would fly in the US. People here don't like having their rights messed with. As to crossbreeding, I'm not a big fan. But I've met some amazing dogs who were intentional mixes of other breeds, and whose breeders seem to be pretty careful. One of those mixes is the "Daisy Dog", whose breeder is very propriatory about them, and requires spay neuter on dogs she sells. The ones I've met are lovely and extremely intelligent. All breeds started with crossbreeding. If it's done with thought and responsibility, who is a kennel club to tell people they can't do it? All they can legitimately tell people is that they won't register them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I don't think that would fly in the US. People here don't like having their rights messed with. As to crossbreeding, I'm not a big fan. But I've met some amazing dogs who were intentional mixes of other breeds, and whose breeders seem to be pretty careful. One of those mixes is the "Daisy Dog", whose breeder is very propriatory about them, and requires spay neuter on dogs she sells. The ones I've met are lovely and extremely intelligent. All breeds started with crossbreeding. If it's done with thought and responsibility, who is a kennel club to tell people they can't do it? All they can legitimately tell people is that they won't register them.
I guess that is the difference between living in Australia and living in the USA... good and bad or pros and cons in both worlds.... and because I grew up with so many laws and rules and regulations, I guess we just kinda accept it in Australia... it is great in some respects and it really sucks in other ways... that was why I moved to the US, for the freedom, but sometimes I forget that with that freedom, there are gonna be some problems, just like with the lack of freedom. Our government often dictates what can and cannot be done and we often don't have a lot of choice... eg... voting is compulsory.... or you receive a fine. Eventually if you don't pay the fine, it is placed in the government collections agency and eventually you will lose your drivers licence or be penalised in some way.

The USA is definitely the land of the free, and I guess I need to not lose sight of that and the reasons that prompted me to move here in the first place.

In Australia it can be very difficult for dog owners as the local laws have a set number of dogs allowed per household... rural areas are of course more lenient.. but for instance the little town of 2000 people where I was living in Australia before my move to the USA, only allowed 2 dogs per house hold. You could live on 2 or 3 acres but still be only allowed a maximum of 2 dogs and 3 cats per household... no exceptions unless an extra dog was bequeathed to you and you obtained permission and paid the relevant registration fees with the local council (city). Dogs and cats must be registered with the local council and for instance in the area where I lived, it cost $80 per year for each un-spayed/un-neutered animal and half that if they had been spayed/neutered. You could raise a litter of puppies, however puppies had to be vacated from the premises by 3 months of age if you already had 2 dogs. The council workers would door knock to see who had registered their animals. Fines for unregistered animals were $200 per animal. An animal caught wandering at large was identified and returned to owner if they had a registered council tag... and owner was fined $100 for a roaming fee. If animal wasn't wearing identication, the animal would end up in local pound for 7 days... after that, either put to sleep or if lucky adopted by RSPCA. Owners were fined $200 for not cleaning up dog yard on a daily basis... because it violates the local health laws. So these rules are good in some respects, as far as keeping dogs in a clean enviroment etc and neighbours not having to put up with the smell of dog poop, but also there is no leniency at all for dog breeders or exhibitors etc. No hotel in Australia will allow dogs, under any circumstances because of government health regulations... only privately owned establishments may allow pets, but they are usually boutique hotels and the prices are exhorbitant. Pets are not allowed on the majority of beaches... though there are some beaches that are dog friendly,,, not many. Some allow dogs on the beach between the hours or 6pm & 8am... but not during the day. Many parks don't allow dogs at all, and the ones that do, are always on leash.... most outdoor malls won't allow you to lead your dog through there. Most outdoor eating areas are the same... no dogs allowed. There are some off leash parks etc, but as a whole, Australia is not a dog friendly place. You definitely could NEVER take your little dog on board an aircraft with you in a pet carrier like you can on some airlines here.

It is taking me a while to get used to the differences... but I definitely like the freedom we have here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
I don't think that would fly in the US. People here don't like having their rights messed with..
Doesn't go over that well in Canada either. Even though the CKC has rules against involved breeders crossbreeding they fully admit to having no teeth to back them up with. Most people I know have a great attitude AGAINST any body or organization that is overbearing and the CKC is always struggling to retain memberships. Most where I am from breed outside of it . . . they just don't have a care to put up with the oversight and see very little benefit.

I know three breeders that originally started out involved in the club, but who left after 15 or so years - still breeding but out of the club.

As to crossbreeding, I'm not a big fan. But I've met some amazing dogs who were intentional mixes of other breeds, and whose breeders seem to be pretty careful. One of those mixes is the "Daisy Dog", whose breeder is very propriatory about them, and requires spay neuter on dogs she sells. The ones I've met are lovely and extremely intelligent. All breeds started with crossbreeding. If it's done with thought and responsibility, who is a kennel club to tell people they can't do it? All they can legitimately tell people is that they won't register them.
My feelings as well.

I also feel EVERY registry would be better helping DOGS, if that was there concern, by bringing back the b-registry system for outcrossing back in. I undersand the KC has done this now. Kudos. If I ever purchase a purebred spaniel I WILL go to Europe to a breeder involved in that just on that effort alone.

SOB
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,765 Posts
I do wish there was some kind of registry that actually meant something. That the fact that a breeder was registered with x registry means that the breeder does y and z and someone actually checks up on that. I think some breeds have this (a breed-specific registry) but there's no all-breed registry like that. But I'm sure that a registry like that would become corrupted and meaningless after a while anyway, so maybe it wouldn't be so great.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
252 Posts
The AKC is not a governing body. They're only a registry. My dog is AKC registered and will soon be UKC registered as well, because I like the agility rules better in the UKC and I may try to show her again.

With that being said, every ethical breeder I know either registers with the AKC, UKC, CKC (Canadian kennel Club), or the Kennel Club. I guess by default, every dog I own now or in the future will probably be AKC registered. Not because I'm a huge fan of AKC, necessarily.

However, breed clubs usually are pretty careful about who they let in, and I personally wouldn't feel comfortable buying from a breeder who felt like they were above the ethics of their own club. If any member of the breed club which I am affiliated is caught breeding blues to blues, or blues to any color but blacks, or who is known to completely disregard ethical breeding practices, they are kicked out.

I know that my breed club requires that two club members in good standing vouch for you (maybe they are all this way). I currently am a member, and I don't have any problem with their rules. I actually think that most of the breeders I know go above and beyond the rules of the Breed Club and really put their heart and souls into their program.

If you know of a breeder who is cross breeding shih tzus and havanese, you should let both breed clubs know in case that person is trying to be a member of either/both club(s). The clubs end up putting out an alert and warning puppy buyers not to purchase from that person. That person would also be kicked out of the club, maybe indefinitely, but at least until they cleaned up their practices and admitted their mistake.

Then again, my breed is rare (thank the Gods) and we don't have many people trying to cross breed with them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,108 Posts
I do wish there was some kind of registry that actually meant something. That the fact that a breeder was registered with x registry means that the breeder does y and z and someone actually checks up on that. I think some breeds have this (a breed-specific registry) but there's no all-breed registry like that. But I'm sure that a registry like that would become corrupted and meaningless after a while anyway, so maybe it wouldn't be so great.
The AKC has the Breeder of Merit program. The requirements are pretty low, but it's something.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
I do wish there was some kind of registry that actually meant something. That the fact that a breeder was registered with x registry means that the breeder does y and z and someone actually checks up on that. I think some breeds have this (a breed-specific registry) but there's no all-breed registry like that. But I'm sure that a registry like that would become corrupted and meaningless after a while anyway, so maybe it wouldn't be so great.
I think the reason it works to a certain point in Australia (not saying they don't have their share of problems, but they do re-inforce their rules and although it isn't common, you do see some members that have been suspended from the association, whose names are published in the ANKC journal)...

Australia only has one governing body... the ANKC and that is it... we don't have any other allbreeds kennel club. We don't have the population to have another kennel club. There are a couple of cross breed registeries which are trying hard to get their breeds recognised, such as the Labradoodle and the Aussie (Australian) Bulldog... neither of which I know much about and whether they will or will not get recognition. The aussie bulldog was supposedly created to breed more of the old style bulldogs that could whelp naturally etc... from the people I have been aquaintanced with in this so called "breed"... the majority of dogs are still not free whelping.

I do like the fact that the ANKC can enforce rules such as health testing, etc... for example, if you are a labrador breeder, ANKC will not register puppies unless both sire and dam are hip & elbow xrayed and rated within the breed standard... there is compulsory eye tests for some breeds, heart tests, etc depending on breed and problems. Usually the breed clubs instigate the health testing and the ANKC enforces it.

In all, the ANKC does work towards the betterment of the breed.... not always the way we would like, but we have seen breeds change of the decades and some for the worse... and that is a whole new can of worms. I just like the fact that there is some control in regards to dogs health and breeding practices etc with the ANKC... but then with those sensible rules and regulations, come the other ridiculous rules and regulations that exist in Australia.

In some respects I guess due to these rules and regulations, Australian dog breeders could lose more rights.... the tail docking ban came into affect a number of years ago and breeders wonder what will be next.

It seems there is always extremes... you can't have one thing without the other... which is a shame.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
.

If you know of a breeder who is cross breeding shih tzus and havanese, you should let both breed clubs know in case that person is trying to be a member of either/both club(s). The clubs end up putting out an alert and warning puppy buyers not to purchase from that person. That person would also be kicked out of the club, maybe indefinitely, but at least until they cleaned up their practices and admitted their mistake.

Then again, my breed is rare (thank the Gods) and we don't have many people trying to cross breed with them.
Thanks for the advice, I never really thought of contacting the breed clubs... which I doubt she would be a member, but worth a try... In Australia we would report directly to the Australian National Kennel Club but of course, that is a membership association/registry where this behaviour will not be tolerated.

I guess it is the breed clubs here that are doing all the work and it is them that we need to be educating the general public about for prospective puppy purchasers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
184 Posts
I don't think that would fly in the US. People here don't like having their rights messed with. As to crossbreeding, I'm not a big fan. But I've met some amazing dogs who were intentional mixes of other breeds, and whose breeders seem to be pretty careful. One of those mixes is the "Daisy Dog", whose breeder is very propriatory about them, and requires spay neuter on dogs she sells. The ones I've met are lovely and extremely intelligent. All breeds started with crossbreeding. If it's done with thought and responsibility, who is a kennel club to tell people they can't do it? All they can legitimately tell people is that they won't register them.
I agree with this. The fact is, people like and want certain purposely bred mixes, just as people like and want certain breeds. That is not going go away, no matter how much some people don't agree with it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,131 Posts
I'm curious now, what would the ANKC do in the off chance one of their members had an accidental litter from non health tested dogs? or (worse?) two different breeds?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
I'm curious now, what would the ANKC do in the off chance one of their members had an accidental litter from non health tested dogs? or (worse?) two different breeds?
This has happened in the past on the odd occasion... and I guess it could well happen more than people know, but the breeder may just choose to keep quiet about it... I guess accidents can always happen.

Of the couple of cases that I know of, and each case is treated individually.... one male labrador bred a bitch that was too young and a litter resulted... the breeder wrote to the ANKC and stated the predicament...and apparently it had to be put to the board etc... then the breeder had to get the parents of the litter health tested before any puppies could be registered. To my knowledge the bitch was only 12 months of age and because hip & elbow xrays are not generally done until 18 months to 2 years of age, the puppies were only allowed to be registered on a "limited" register until the bitch could be xrayed again at the appropriate age and pass the scores required. If either of the parents had failed the xrays, none of the puppies would have been registered. If both parents were of the ideal hip & elbow reading, then the puppies on the limited registry could then be upgraded to the open register at the ANKCs discretion. The breeder received a warning from ANKC and the property where the dogs resided was inspected also. If a second accident occured, then the ANKC will suspend the breeders membership. ANKC can also request any dogs to be DNA before registering litters if they deem that it is necessary to do so... they did try to bring in DNA but it didn't pass... though I voted for it, obviously some breeders didn't want the added expense of DNA.... I have no doubt compulsory DNA testing will eventually come into effect, just as compulsory microchipping has done.

As far as cross bred litters, you hear of it happening but it is kept very quiet and no breeder is going to admit that they had an accident. There was one incident that a breeder registered a litter of puppies but they were not purebred... but on paper they were purebred... Newfoundlands.... it was an accidental litter from a Newfie bitch and by a black flat coated retriever dog... Silly breeder, even though she sold the puppies on a limited register to unsuspecting puppy purchasers, the pups eventually grew up and didn't get as big as they should and obviously didn't look purebred. One puppy purchaser reported her to the ANKC, the woman was suspended from the ANKC for 5 years. She never did show her face again, even after her suspension was up. I guess the embarrassment of being caught and considering the dog show ring can be a bitchy place at the best of times, I don't think I would want to show up after I had done something as deceitful as she had done. Apparently some other puppy purchasers came forward and had stated that their veterinarian had told them that the puppy was not purebred at 3 months of age, but by that time, the puppy buyer was so attached to the animal, they couldn't part with it... when the breeder was contacted, she apparently refused any compensation.. or refund of some of the original purchase price.

Obviously there could still be some loop holes and the ANKC does try to be fair... but generally speaking, usually most members are fairly honest as they fear their reputation is at stake.

Another interesting thing is that the majority of breeders who are members of the ANKC, actively show their dogs. The largest number of memberships are made up of conformation exhibitors and then followed by obedience, field and retrieving trial exhibitors etc... There are fewer breeders who just breed purebred registered pets. Those members who don't actively exhibit their dogs, are a minority and not well received by the other members... not saying I agree with this, it is just how it is. In my opinion, if the members who are just breeding pets, are abiding by all the guidelines set out by the ANKC, (and they have to be or their puppies would not be registered and they would be suspended from the ANKC) then there is no reason they should be discriminated against... the only thing that I can see, is that sometimes a prospective puppy purchaser will purchase a show dog from one of these breeders and because the breeder is not actively exhibiting their dogs and hence does not really have much of an idea of the quality of a show dog, often these puppies are purely wonderful and healthy pets, but just don't make it in the show ring ............ and that comes back to the puppy purchaser not doing enough research and going to dog shows etc before purchasing a show prospect.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,406 Posts
. ANKC can also request any dogs to be DNA before registering litters if they deem that it is necessary to do so... they did try to bring in DNA but it didn't pass... though I voted for it, obviously some breeders didn't want the added expense of DNA.... I have no doubt compulsory DNA testing will eventually come into effect, just as compulsory microchipping has done.
Obviously there could still be some loop holes and the ANKC does try to be fair... but generally speaking, usually most members are fairly honest as they fear their reputation is at stake.

.
ASCA now requires DNA on any dogs being bred. It sounds to me as if the rules don't prevent accidents. They just make the breeders try to hide the fact.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
Maybe AKC doesn't support cross breeding, but I am appauled at the fact that there are some breeders out there actively involved in 'local' kennel clubs... who show at AKC shows but yet still insist on advertsing designer breeds for sale. . .
I have a question for you Griffon.

Because I have a firm belief that if the breeder is ethical, then it doesn't matter what they are breeding, why does this fact appaul you.

I am the opposite. I am truly appauled that many of the main dog registering bodies exclusively promote the breeding of only purebred dogs, and made that decision even in the beginning. I am not a fan of the original decision to 'exclude' breeders by the lineage of what they were breeding, rather than the breeding practices utilized . . . HATE the idea that when clubs joined the umbrella registry they were told to close their stud books which were often open to that point.

The main reason is that I can't think of a much more harmful influence on dogs than that. Closed stud books + encouraged overly specific selection along with a system that celebrates matador studs is a recipe for trouble. A secondary reason is that I have always hated groups that encourage and celebrate that 'exclusive' group mindset . . . that might even be higher on the totem pole when I think about it.

I certainly can't figure out why any organization would just want to promote the health and welfare and breeding of exclusively purebred dogs. My head screams 'but why not ALL dogs'? It just makes no sense to me. It feels very wrong and that possibly comes from a humanities perspective.

I kept coming back to this post and reading the ANKC rules and getting almost nauseous reading them, specifically #2 and #15, so I thought a bit on why.

So, what is it that is appauling to you about the AKC being perfectly O.K. with breeders breeding both pure and mixed litters?

SOB
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
948 Posts
...
Because I have a firm belief that if the breeder is ethical, then it doesn't matter what they are breeding, why does this fact appaul you.
...
SOB
now, this is an interesting twist on ethics....

A person is usually described as ethical because of what they do. Here, we're describing behavior as ethical because of who is doing it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
now, this is an interesting twist on ethics....

A person is usually described as ethical because of what they do. Here, we're describing behavior as ethical because of who is doing it.
No twist. I didn't describe a breeder as ethical. I said IF a breeder is ethical . . . I left the description up to the reader.

IMHO a breeder is ethical because of what they do . . . . as in they assess their stock, they appropriately test, place with care, back their puppies etc.

What they 'breed' together or create in their pups is NOT part of that equation. I'm interested in an objective reason why it might be for some.

I know why it is not for me.

SOB
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
948 Posts
When you put it like that it seems so obvious -- I feel kinda silly now.

I don't see much to get "appauled" about either. It's a club, they can make whatever rules they like, but I'm kind of appalled that Australia's kennel club would try to control its members' property like that. Didn't realize Aussie's were so into being regulated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
I have a question for you Griffon.

Because I have a firm belief that if the breeder is ethical, then it doesn't matter what they are breeding, why does this fact appaul you.

I am the opposite. I am truly appauled that many of the main dog registering bodies exclusively promote the breeding of only purebred dogs, and made that decision even in the beginning. I am not a fan of the original decision to 'exclude' breeders by the lineage of what they were breeding, rather than the breeding practices utilized . . . HATE the idea that when clubs joined the umbrella registry they were told to close their stud books which were often open to that point.

The main reason is that I can't think of a much more harmful influence on dogs than that. Closed stud books + encouraged overly specific selection along with a system that celebrates matador studs is a recipe for trouble. A secondary reason is that I have always hated groups that encourage and celebrate that 'exclusive' group mindset . . . that might even be higher on the totem pole when I think about it.

I certainly can't figure out why any organization would just want to promote the health and welfare and breeding of exclusively purebred dogs. My head screams 'but why not ALL dogs'? It just makes no sense to me. It feels very wrong and that possibly comes from a humanities perspective.

I kept coming back to this post and reading the ANKC rules and getting almost nauseous reading them, specifically #2 and #15, so I thought a bit on why.

So, what is it that is appauling to you about the AKC being perfectly O.K. with breeders breeding both pure and mixed litters?

SOB
The fact that there are puppy mills and breeders breeding puppies purely for profit with no concern for the life or health of the puppy and so many breeders that still register AKC puppies but are unethical. I have never seen so many puppy mills and so many so called breeders who have AKC registered puppies but yet pump out puppies and cross breds which are bred in terrible conditions, half the time don't even look like purebreds and too often end up in a shelter.

Because of the structure of the ANKC, many Australians have a mindset that if puppies are ANKC registered, then they are being bred by hopefully "ethical breeders" because of the stringent rules... and mostly this is the case... but unfortunately there is still going to be unethical breeders and breeders trying to bend the rules to suit themselves. But for the most part, due to rules and regulations of the association, ethical breeders are more commonplace than those who are unscrupulous.

If a breeder in Australia wants to crossbreed etc and do it ethically, like they have done with the "Labradoodles".... and I really don't have an opinion on these dogs... there are a good many breeders apparently trying to get them recognised, they have their own association, health testing etc... there are obviously those Labradoodle breeders that are in the Australian Labradoodle Association (or whatever they are called) and then there are those who are not... Of course the ANKC doesn't recognise them at this point as a breed, but the breed club has set health standards etc and are striving to one day have them registered with ANKC. ANKC isn't totally closed to accepting new breeds, afterall, they accepted the Australian Cattle Dog, the Australian Silky Terrier, the Australian Stumpy Tail Cattle Dog, the Australian Kelpie and the Jack Russel Terrier and most recently the Tenterfield Terrier (previously known as the Miniature Fox Terrier). The orignal Mini Fox Terrier club is still going because there were two different breed types and the ANKC selected one type and the Mini Fox Terrier breeders wanted to keep another type... they are a breed club and they will never be associated with the ANKC...

Puppy famers/mills in Australia are NEVER ANKC registered... as the ANKC along with the RSPCA is trying to put an end to these practices. Hence the move to no ANKC registered puppies to be sold in petstores. Some say that this is just encouraging more unscrupulous people to breed unregistered dogs to sell in pet stores with no regard to health etc... which it may well be, but with education and the ANKC has education and awareness programmes now in many Australian schools... they are hoping to educate the general public on puppy mills and backyard breeders that have no ethics and trying to educate the general public to adopt from shelters or purchase from reputable breeders. Whilst there are some breeders who choose to not register their puppies with ANKC and use them for their original purpose... the majority of these breeders are not selling puppies to pet stores or puppy farms....There are many gun dogs breeders in Australia that do not actively show their dogs or have anything to do with any ANKC sanctioned events, but they still breed ANKC registered dogs, follow the guidelines and breed only for working lines. I know of a few hunting people, who couldn't care less if their Bull Arabs (Australian Hog Hunting breed of dog which contains a number of breeds) are ever recognised by ANKC... they have a good strain of hunting dogs which are bred for a purpose. Do they health test their animals, probably not. Are they breeding for profit and dogs living in horrid conditions, probably not... But they are very unlikely to ever become a family pet.... most of these breeders sell pups to other hunters. Yes the dog shelters are recieving a few of these dogs, but not as many as the little designer breeds that have been cross bred to get yet another "doodle".

The ANKC was well aware that I also had working border collies and I still do, over here. The ANKC bred border collies generally cannot compare to the purely working bred collies. Most of my working colllies were registered with the working collie council, but some were not, some were just working dogs, possibly with some kelpie or smithfield or koolie blood. If I had owned an ANKC border collies and cross bred them, I am sure ANKC would have suspended me... but the fact is, the ANKC border collies just don't cut it as working dogs...The working collies are the dogs that are favoured for their ability and so it would be rare that there are crosses with ANKC stock these days. Did I ever have a litter of purely working dogs, yes occasionally,,, were they registered.... no, they were purely working dogs. Did I breed for profit and flood the market with these dogs.... no, they were all put to work. The working collie breeders couldn't care less about ANKC and breed purely for working ability... again, majority of those dogs end up working and not as pets and there is least concern that they are gonna end up part of the unwanted dog population.

I don't have a problem with anyone breeding dogs for what they were originally intended, working etc... and many of the AKC ANKC breeds have lost their working ability for what they were originally intended... for reasons you have mentioned... I don't deny that. But most of these working bred dogs are not the ones that unscrupulous people are breeding for profit and following trends of the so called designer breeds.


Australians aren't into being regulated, we are born into that type of society and just accept it as the way things are. It isn't until you live somewhere else that you realise how many rules and regulations we accept... and how much freedom you have here.... like I said in an earlier post, some are rules in Australia are for the better and some are absolutely ridiculous. Australia is definitely not a dog friendly country like the US or parts of Europe etc. And that annoys the majority of dog owners there, that they cannot take their animals on holidays/vacations with them for the most part, because most establishments are not dog friendly. Boarding kennels in Australia are often booked out months in advance during Xmas and Easter times.... purely because most Australians cannot take their dogs on vacation with them, unless they are camping somewhere or have their own camper trailer (and majority of RV parks don't allow dogs either).

And because Australians are born into this mindset... just as you are here with your rights not being messed with, it is so very different and hard to get ones head around the differences.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,851 Posts
This is the reason I don't worry about AKC registration. I breed for working ability. If I find an awesome dog with perfect drives, I don't care if it is registered or not. I commonly see malinois/Dutch mixes, and see no issues with these dogs. I evean considered breeding my Dutch bitch to a malinois that complemented her well. Though I found a better stud that is a Dutch. To me, working ability is more important than having papers on a dog, in this venue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
252 Posts
SOB- do you know anyone who breeds mixes and does it ethically?

I don't have a problem with mixes per se, as long as they have a purpose... Silken windhounds and Alaskan huskies and what the dalmations are doing to promote breed health are just some examples where I think that breeding mixes is totally fine. Certain herding dogs are mixes and they're bred for working and I don't care much about the mix, I just love to see a good dog work.


For me personally, and like Julie I guess, I have the highest respect for a dog that can do what it was bred to do, regardless of anything else.

So, health (and by health I also mean soundness), working ability, and then strict conformation.

As for not thinking that breed clubs are exclusive, I kind of think they have to be! I don't want just anyone being able to say they're a member and using that as a way to attract puppy buyers. As long as the rules promote the overall health and well being and maintenance of a particular breed, then what's the issue?

As a newbie, I can't tell you how helpful its been to be a part of a club of people who love the same things I do, and who really care. People who don't know me answer my questions at shows and have never stopped encouraging me.

I don't know why everyone things that purebred breeders are so elitist and snotty. I think that's more public perception then actual truth. Sure, they're quirky, but aren't we all? I don't know ANYONE who is really into dogs that is what I would consider normal, from rescue people to breeders.

If anything, I run into more snobbery from rescue workers who think that they're holier-then-thou because they rescue. Oh, you bought from a breeder?? Well, I SAVED a life! And while that's cool, and everyone has that option, why look down your nose at me because getting a purebred from an excellent breeder was a better option for ME?

Surely mixed breeds can have clubs, too, if they want to promote a particular standard for breeding? is anyone stopping them? The knowledge of how to be an ethical breeder is in so many books and is out on the web just at anyone's fingertips. There is a cockapoo club of america, but I know nothing about them. Labradoodles and Goldendoodles probably have one, too.


So...anyway...I was hoping you could maybe clarify what you meant by breeding mixes and what you mean by ethically...
 
1 - 20 of 57 Posts
Top