Alternative AKC registries - ?

The AKC acts as a registry for the breed standards that are developed and maintained by the breed clubs.  Changes to breed standard come from the breed club but only under specific procedures and submission of drafts to the AKC and votes by the breed club members.  There has been a change in our standard which I absolutely hate (has to do with missing teeth and what is an acceptable bite), but it has occurred and now I must live with it.  I can however hold myself to a higher standard.

 The AKC is a business that attempts through its events, public relations and print materials to support pure bred dogs.  It has its faults (I complain about them often) but is also stands true to its vision statement.

 Many, many, many AKC dogs are randomly bred by backyard breeders (and mills) with no attention to health, or pedigree or the standard for conformation and temperment (let alone type).  However, the ONLY responsible breeders that I have met in my long history in purebred dogs (so that I may compete in dog sports) come from folks who are in both breed clubs (and adhere to the breeder code of ethics for those clubs) and show in AKC events. 

 Performance titles are not the end all or be all, and I will offer dogs I have seen who are competing in the high stakes (read that money winning) dogs in stock dog trials.  There are numerous dogs with structural faults who win and are game enough to run on heart and get bred only to find health issues later in the dog and its offspring.  I see plenty of working (K9) that have no more type for the breed than a randomly bred shepherd mix that shows up in any local pound or shelter.

 Any time you emphasize one aspect (type or performance) over the whole package, you end up with breed changes, health problems, structural faults or temperment issues (any or all depending on the situation)

I've met some very ethical breeders who breed wonderful healthy drivey mixed-breed dogs for flyball and agility. People who breed obviously structurally incorrect dogs regardless of how many titles they have won are not ethical.

I spent quite a while tonight reading all the replies and discussions regarding my original post here. In fact, I re-read many posts and replies several times. Quite frankly, when I returned [to this web site after many days away] I was hoping my post had died - but it hadn't which isn't a bad thing. I did not expect my original post to generate so much traffic; however, I do believe the replies and discussions have been healthy to the forum because those that participated [in the discussion] spoke from the heart. Perhaps I can help bring some closure to my post [and hopefully many or most of us can agree to] to my conclusion which is: It's not any registry, be it a well known one that has been around forever or a less known one that's been around for less time, that determines the quality of a breed. My conclusion is: It's the quality of the breeder that counts. Say it three times to yourself: It's the quality of the breeder that counts. It's the quality of the breeder that counts. It's the quality of the breeder that counts. Whether the breeder uses a registry [or any paper work or not]: It's still THE QUALITY OF THE BREEDER THAT COUNTS. One person that replied in the discussion put it much better than I could say it above, and I quote: "There is plenty of paper necessary to demonstrate you have a dog that is well bred and true to the standard. The registries are in business. It is the ethics of the person involved in producing the dog that matter."

By George, you've got it

 

I can dig what you're saying but in all honesty, if I were a breeder I would not register my dogs with registries that were created specifically to cater to the commercial breeding industry. I do not support the commercial breeding industry, I do not support irresponsible breeding and I wouldn't want my dogs to be registered with a registry that supports and encourages those things.  A lot of these registries don't offer much more than a piece of paper, and maybe a gold star, that says your dog is registered. A lot of them do not sponsor dog related events, they do not participate in canine health research, they don't keep up to date on issues affecting dogs so I really don't understand the point of registering with such registries as you really don't get much with your registration. Then again, if you don't plan on breeding responsibly or plan on participating in dog related events or have a pet quality dog then there really is no need to register your dog especially with questionable registries.  

mjp29

It's still THE QUALITY OF THE BREEDER THAT COUNTS. One person that replied in the discussion put it much better than I could say it above, and I quote: "There is plenty of paper necessary to demonstrate you have a dog that is well bred and true to the standard. The registries are in business. It is the ethics of the person involved in producing the dog that matter."

 

     Absolutely! Its the breeder, not the registry that counts!

     I wonder, all the staunch AKC supporters, didn't you hear several months ago AKC was trying to get in bed with the Petland that sells puppies? They were offering Petland an incentive deal for them to purchase only AKC pups and have their indivigual registrations sent in. They are loosing quite a bit of revenue from indivigual registrations and this deal was only quenched when many parent breed clubs learned of this and protested. 
     Even the "show world" is beginning to become annoyed with AKC - in the Sept. '07 issue of the Show Beagle Quarterly, there is an article from the editor entitled "What is AKC thinking?" Apparently, dogs competing in teh Bred By class no longer have to actually be Bred By Exhibitor!? HUH Seems theri entries for this class were low so they decided to throw their own rules out the window!!!!! On a similar note, I was also happy to see some GORGEOUS UKC show champion hounds in that same issue. I've noticed that overall quality of this breed has only gone UP in the past few years, and that has NOTHING to do with AKC - its the breeders that are making better decisions ...

Actually the delegates did rise up against the agreement.  It has since disappeared, hopefully forever. There was a backlash like you have never seen toward any other AKC policy.

   I feel I should clarify my point about breeder ethics being the most important.  I do not, nor do I expect in the near and not so near future, support the use of alternative registries such as CKC (not the Canadian Kennel Club), APRI etc.  These registries do not meet my personal standards.  I will stick with AKC, UKC and foreign registries.  Working registries and breed specific registries (kelpies, jrts, bcsa) do meet my personal goals but I do not have those breeds.

HM....you can dig up dirt and bad ideas on just about any registry or organization out there...and likely the oldest and largest will have the most.

You don't like AKC, and I get that...for the record, I don't like lumpy oatmeal. *shrug*

People can make their own choices...I use two registries and show in both...I have problems with both registries policies from time to time. Such is life.

rwbeagles

HM....you can dig up dirt and bad ideas on just about any registry or organization out there...and likely the oldest and largest will have the most.

You don't like AKC, and I get that...

 

     Gina, don't get me wrong - its not that I don't like AKC! Most of my dogs are AKC reg.'d and my next one is going to be AKC as well - out of 100% show breeding. The point I was attempting to get across is not that AKC is bad, while the "alternative" regestries are good, or vice versa. Neither are inherently all bad or good, because they are only regestries, and there's just as many reputable and dishonest APRI breeders as there are AKC - no more, no less. There are many things AKC has done to prove it is in bed with commercial breeders, yet they make the best efforts to sweep this under the rug so the "fancy" never finds out ... Its a peeve of mine when someone condemns an indivigual breeder because of the registry they choose to use, or OTOH, use registry as one of the points in distinguishing reputable breeders from disreputable ones.    

That is not always true.

 

My Beagle is registered with United All Breed Registry. I bought it from Petland Chain Stores. I later contacted his breeder which is a reputable one. I have four generations of my dog registered, and through his Sire; five of them were FLD CHs.

 

I’m doing a doctorate degree and it is the same. If you graduate from Harvard it does not make you a better professional. The courses are the same and they have to be approved by accreditation nationally.

 

The same with other Registries approved by the USDA.

 

The important thing is contacting the breeder and realize by yourself that he is authentic. Exclusivist-club in AKC is not what makes a dog purebred. It is good, but not the center of the animal-world.

 

They are mad because now they are having competition from other clubs. No one “golf-club” should be the unique one; and others have the right to compete.

 

I hate to add to an old thread, but I have a hard time believing a good breeder would want their pups to end up in Petland...

Some of these breeders have grown as a kennel themselves and with the economic situation in the country as bow they have no choice but look for the business part as well. I know it sounds “cold”. I’m planning myself to become maybe a breeder in the future, and I can’t imagine to even selling the puppies unless to cover first expenses; but some of these breeders have the breeding business as their only way to pay their bills. Their primary source of money.

 

Years ago this will work, but now I have seen even people awfully giving up their pets because they had lost their homes and jobs.

 

Things will get worse.

 

My Beagle is perfectly purebred and is lovely, and he sleeps with me as well like a baby, everyday.

 

I’ll get a girl for next year.

 

I even met a couple living in the mountings of north of Georgia. They love Beagles and they are having some puppies soon, and they are not registered with AKC.

 

Esvipron

My Beagle is registered with United All Breed Registry. I bought it from Petland Chain Stores. I later contacted his breeder which is a reputable one. I have four generations of my dog registered, and through his Sire

Really? Petland gets most all of their pups from the same amish breeder. Graber is their name.

http://www.petshoppuppies.org/_videoplayer/myvideoplayer.html

Please watch all the videos.

Esvipron

Exclusivist-club in AKC is not what makes a dog purebred. It is good, but not the center of the animal-world.

Actually, yes it is. Other clubs are hoping to be taken as seriously and all the talk here in this thread is still in reference to AKC. Just go through and count how many times you see the acronym AKC or the words America Kennel Club. Saying the king is dead, long live the king, doesn't make it so. AKC is still the one to beat. I don't always agree with some of the practices. But even I will refer to the AKC standards when describing my dog.

UAB - what standards do they have? What are their standards for Lab? Siberian Husky? What about a mix of the two? How were these standards derived? And when adopted? How did they determine that these characteristics represent the breeds involved? The last couple of shows, I have seen Sibes in the working group and the entrants were from an actual sled dog team. Is the UAB going to put on breed shows and will working breeds get a fair shake? AKC requires breeders to meet certain standards. Does the UAB do the same?

Hey, when you run with the big dogs, you've got to run like a big dog.

It is not just running like a big dog...it is being actually a big dog inside. Appearance does not always say.

 

I had dogs all my life, and maybe I double your age (44). My first dog, a mix Samoyed lived 16 years with me, and I did not need an AKC club where I was born (Havana-Cuba) to show how pure were my Dobermans, German Shepherd, Welsh Springer Spaniel or others our family had.

 

You are too tied down to appearances.

 

Esvipron

It is not just running like a big dog...it is being actually a big dog inside. Appearance does not always say

I think you misunderstood the meaning, which is possible as I think we might dealing with a language barrier. The point of my comment was that if these other registries are going to be of value, they must have conditions similar to AKC and I don't say that to be provincial. You didn't reply to any of the questions I had about standards, how they were adopted and when, how is a particular breed defined, is the working ability of the dog at least as important as a minute point about the dog's structure? Or is it simply a paper so that one can say the dog is registered. I can get a registry for my mutt right now. And it would serve a useful purpose lighting the charcoal on my grill.

Esvipron

I had dogs all my life, and maybe I double your age (44).

Are you saying that you are 88 years old? Certainly, you are savvy to look up my profile. BTW, can you tell others as others having problems accessing my profile. I mentioned it before to admin and nothing was done, so I figured it was unimportant.

No, I don't guess other countries necessarily look to the AKC and that's fine. I'm sure you have fine dogs, too. You may call me provincial, however, in that there are only a few registries that I am aware of that have standards and history that anyone can see. AKC, UKC, to name a few. And there's the world of working dogs, wherein the history of the lines in their performance is important. You should see how tight Alaskan Husky breeding is. It is their practice to only breed from dogs on winning teams. And the lineages are defined not by foundation stock but by competition titles.

So, how does one define the purity of your dogs? Through some kind of registry or notice? And who defines those standards? I could call Shadow an Alaskan Husky (basically any mix of dog that may have some Siberian Husky, to oversimplify it) but he's not. Certainly not by the standards of Alaskan Husky breeders. I'm not being a snot but how was the purity of your dogs defined? Correct the faulty education of my youth, if you would.