AKC - Self Preservation At All Costs

Becca it kind of makes me wonder what is even the point of all these registries?  Some of the best WORKING German Shepherds are not registered or are even Mal/GSD crosses *sarcastic gasp*.  Most police units couldn't care less whether the dog is registered and with whom.  They often import dogs from Europe, sometimes the dogs are registered but it is lost in translation or too much work to follow up on since these dogs will work, not parade around the ring or do 10 minutes here or there for a sporting title.

GSDs have the WDA (GSDCA - Working Dog Association).  There are a few other SchH venues, but the WDA is the only one recognized by the FCI.  The WDA includes HGH herding, SV style conformation shows (which are conformation but also include working demos, off leash heeling, breed surveys, etc), and Schutzhund trials.  Still not perfect though.  Look at some videos of the "working" class dogs doing bitework at recent Sieger shows...I think I've clicker trained my CAT to demonstrate more drive!

The ABCA, JRTCA, and ASCA were the original breed clubs and have as their mission the preservation of working lines.  The ABCA specifically has as its goal to ensure that stock handlers have the best possible stockdogs.  They do this through offering the registration service (asssisting people to track working lines), supporting the working trials, and supporting the advancement of health and genetics (they provide financial support to research, educate breeders, and offer notations on pedigrees for breeders to indicate various clinical testing goals hav been met. 

The ABCA also disciplines negiligent, fraudulent, and abusive breeders, and maintains their working lines through their policy of deregistering dual registered dogs which have finished a conforamation championship.

I'm not sure whether this answers your question of what's the point of these registries? but that's where the BC working registry is coming from. 

brookcove

The system is broken.  I don't know how to fix it, but I think the first step is to admit there's a problem rather than saying, "Oh, it's fine, we just need to be more SUPPORTIVE."

 The system is broken because an all breed registry registers puppies from commercial breeders?

brookcove

The Bouvier people have a neat program where they've got a seperate resgisry for people interested in preserving/conserving the working heritage of the breed.  Their events are very serious, not "wannabe" programs.  The quality of their program is recognized internationally - they work with FCI and the French working trial organization (not sure what they are called).  They do herding through AHBA, a program that predates the AKC's by many years.  Hardly small potatoes.  They are making real changes and slowly but surely are creating a strong future for their breed that emphasizes the importance of the total package, with the working aspect as the standard rather than just conformation.

 Sounds like a neat program and one which would be neat to see done with Belgians. Our UKC breed club tries real hard to have a better conformation judging system. In UKC the dogs are conformation rated, given written critiques, have assisted animation (double handling)  and judged by breeder judges. The UKC National is judged by notable foriegn breeder judges. They also have developed (and are still developing) character tests which are held at the National to test the dog's socialbility, reaction to sound and working apitude. It is a start but the club still is mostly conformation based.

brookcove

The JRTCA (Jack Russell) has a thriving working oriented breed club, as does the ABCA (Border Collies) and ASCA (Aussies).  

In all these breeds, it's the difference between conformation being held up as the highest standard of excellence, and conformation being just something that is done (or not done at all, as in the ABCA).  I think this attitude makes all the difference in protecting the health and genetic stability of the breed.

 And that is the difference between a single breed registery and an all breed registery.

One thing I struggle with is that it seems like many breeds need to be more selective, yet the more selective we get the more people get upset.  For example, now I don't know if this is true, but let's assume it is, I was told that when registering GSDs with the SV in Germany, there is a limit to how many in a litter can be registered.  I guess the point is that not ALL GSDs are great examples of the breeding and breeding quality dogs, obviously there is variance in every litter.  So I guess theoretically that sounds like a good thing....but then people get up in arms about the possibility of the unregistered dogs being culled....

I think the general public needs to get over this notion that a "registered" dog makes or breaks a dog.  Why does a pet owner need a registered dog?  Why does anyone need a registered dog unless they plan on competing or breeding? (and even then you can compete in plenty of venues without being registered!)  I don't understand why people always assume that a registered dog implies some standard of quality.  Coke is far better family pet than Kenya and he is not registered, but Kenya is dually registered. If I want to, I can still do agility, rally, pet therapy, and dock-diving with Coke.

Liesje

One thing I struggle with is that it seems like many breeds need to be more selective, yet the more selective we get the more people get upset.  For example, now I don't know if this is true, but let's assume it is, I was told that when registering GSDs with the SV in Germany, there is a limit to how many in a litter can be registered.  I guess the point is that not ALL GSDs are great examples of the breeding and breeding quality dogs, obviously there is variance in every litter.  So I guess theoretically that sounds like a good thing....but then people get up in arms about the possibility of the unregistered dogs being culled....

  I checked out USA's website and couldn't find mention of this rule, so it may have been done away with. It was not a limit on the number of puppies that could be regsitered but a limit on how many puppies the mother could care for. If foster dams could be found for the "extras", that was acceptable. However, if not the extra puppies were PTS. This was done at far too young of an age to know which puppies may or may not be breeding quality, with the exception of DQs.

Liesje

I think the general public needs to get over this notion that a "registered" dog makes or breaks a dog.  Why does a pet owner need a registered dog?  Why does anyone need a registered dog unless they plan on competing or breeding? (and even then you can compete in plenty of venues without being registered!)  I don't understand why people always assume that a registered dog implies some standard of quality.  Coke is far better family pet than Kenya and he is not registered, but Kenya is dually registered. If I want to, I can still do agility, rally, pet therapy, and dock-diving with Coke.

  Not everyone wants a mixed breed or a generic "good pet", even if they don't have competition or breeding in mind. There is nothin wrong with a pet owner wanting a dog with a known background of a certain breed.

AgileGSD

  Not everyone wants a mixed breed or a generic "good pet", even if they don't have competition or breeding in mind. There is nothin wrong with a pet owner wanting a dog with a known background of a certain breed.

But a known background and certain breed don't have to = registered.  And even if someone did want to compete, that's what the ILP is for.

Liesje

But a known background and certain breed don't have to = registered.  And even if someone did want to compete, that's what the ILP is for.

 What is wrong with a dog being regsitered? It seems a bit silly to seek out a well bred purebred only to have to ILP it if you decide you want to compete.

AgileGSD

Liesje

But a known background and certain breed don't have to = registered.  And even if someone did want to compete, that's what the ILP is for.

 What is wrong with a dog being regsitered? It seems a bit silly to seek out a well bred purebred only to have to ILP it if you decide you want to compete.

Nothing, I'm not talking about people like you or I I'm talking about people like my friends and family who will pay $2000 for a puppy mill dog that has spent the first 6 weeks of its life in it's own ***, born to parents with who know what genetic health problems and terrible temperaments, all because the dog is "AKC registered".  It seems the general public assumes a "papered" dog is all they need to find to ensure quality and also assume that any dog that is AKC registered MUST come from a reputable breeder (not people who actually know what they are looking for and find a "well bred" purebred, as you say).  We both know that is false and false.  I just don't get the obsession with "papered" dogs or why people will spend so much money finding a registered dog but not spend 5 minutes actually learning about the breed and what makes a breeder reputable.

Liesje

Nothing, I'm not talking about people like you or I I'm talking about people like my friends and family who will pay $2000 for a puppy mill dog that has spent the first 6 weeks of its life in it's own ***, born to parents with who know what genetic health problems and terrible temperaments, all because the dog is "AKC registered".  It seems the general public assumes a "papered" dog is all they need to find to ensure quality and also assume that any dog that is AKC registered MUST come from a reputable breeder (not people who actually know what they are looking for and find a "well bred" purebred, as you say).  We both know that is false and false.  I just don't get the obsession with "papered" dogs or why people will spend so much money finding a registered dog but not spend 5 minutes actually learning about the breed and what makes a breeder reputable.

 It has become rare for me to find a "puppy mill" bred dog regsitered with AKC in my area. The Petland here sells only APRI registered puppies and has since opening six or so years ago. The flea market brokers/buyers and local small scale commercial breeders all have APRI or CKC (Chuck's Kennel Club ;)) registered dogs. When I have seen the listings of dog auctions, it seems that most of the dogs are not AKC registered. I think you're off base thinking that AKC registration papers are the selling point for most pet owners. If that were the case, commercial breeders would not have left AKC in the first place and no one would pay for unregistered designer mixed breeds.

Well just today I've been communicating with two different people looking at two different breeds that saw "AKC registered" dogs and assumed the breeders were responsible.

We do not really have dog auctions or parking lot sales here, but I can think of three pet stores I could go drive to that sell AKC registered dogs.

What I see is that people are just ignorant and assume that most breeders are good.  It seems they are assuming a registered dog meets some standard other than just being a purebred, and that a breeder advertising their dogs as registered must be a great, responsible breeder.  Some people are crushed to learn otherwise.  Too many people I have met have learned the hard way. 

Liesje

We do not really have dog auctions or parking lot sales here, but I can think of three pet stores I could go drive to that sell AKC registered dogs.

 May be a regional thing, although AKC is hurting from the loss of commercial breeder registrations which means that far fewer commercial breeders are using them.

Liesje

What I see is that people are just ignorant and assume that most breeders are good.  It seems they are assuming a registered dog meets some standard other than just being a purebred, and that a breeder advertising their dogs as registered must be a great, responsible breeder.  Some people are crushed to learn otherwise.  Too many people I have met have learned the hard way. 

Which is not really the fault of the regsitry but the fault of people not doing their research.

AgileGSD

Liesje

What I see is that people are just ignorant and assume that most breeders are good.  It seems they are assuming a registered dog meets some standard other than just being a purebred, and that a breeder advertising their dogs as registered must be a great, responsible breeder.  Some people are crushed to learn otherwise.  Too many people I have met have learned the hard way. 

Which is not really the fault of the regsitry but the fault of people not doing their research.

I agree.  I'm just trying to offer alternative ways of doing it for those that feel the AKC needs to accept more responsibility.  Personally, I have always viewed the AKC as a registry, like a US Census.  They gather info and keep track of it but aren't really responsible for those individuals.  But now in recent threads it seems people expect more from the AKC and feel they have a responsibility.

It is a mess. Even in ASCA, which is the anti-AKC Aussie registry, we are seeing dogs with tons of bone, heavy coats and no brains winning left and right. It's really sad to see people "dedicated to preserving the breed" change it so dramatically.

As for the AKC, I think they are in a tough spot. They have become a sponsor of dog programs and sports, which makes them more responsible for practices in my opinion. Commercial dog breeding is a new and cumbersome problem and there is no clear, good solution.

Pit_Pointer_Aussie

It is a mess. Even in ASCA, which is the anti-AKC Aussie registry, we are seeing dogs with tons of bone, heavy coats and no brains winning left and right. It's really sad to see people "dedicated to preserving the breed" change it so dramatically.

 You mean they are starting to look like AKC Aussies? That is interesting but no surprise. IME Any time you have a large number conformation only breeders within a breed, you will end up with showy looking dogs (lots of coat, lots of bone, lots of angulation, big heads, skinny heads and other such extremes) and inproper temperaments being considered "show/breeding quality". The show Border Collies were not the creation of AKC conformation people but they quickly became the norm in the AKC conformation ring when the breed was given full recognition. Seeing their judges education, the dogs all looked like cookie cutters most times. Once there was one that looked like a real BC but I had to wonder if he was there just as an example of what not to put up in the ring.

AgileGSD

Pit_Pointer_Aussie

It is a mess. Even in ASCA, which is the anti-AKC Aussie registry, we are seeing dogs with tons of bone, heavy coats and no brains winning left and right. It's really sad to see people "dedicated to preserving the breed" change it so dramatically.

 You mean they are starting to look like AKC Aussies?

Yup, and your right it's not surprising. I have seen dogs that look like merle golden retrieves take BOB over dogs that clearly fit the standard better. Obviously it's subjective, but when a b!tch (that could be mistaken for a dog) wins BOB and then the judges goes to put another b!tch up as BOS -- there is clearly a problem.

The other thing that kills me are dogs finishing really young and then maturing right past the standard. I'd rather see the emphasis on adult dogs of reproducing age at shows, since the goal is to be evaluate the breeding stock.