shortstep

So can you clarify that what you have said above is true, you'd like to see an open studbook for all breeds, even those with no health issues? A yes will suffice. Now read this, it is The Kennel Club, their words not mine, their policy not mine. Enhancing genetic diversity The move, approved by the Kennel Club General Committee last year, will if used, enhance genetic diversity by widening breed gene pools and allowing new bloodlines to be introduced within breeds. Ok got it, their words not mine. If you do not like their words then send them an email and tell them about it. Try the tone you are taking with me I am sure they will be impressed.

I have an oodle that I got from a shelter, and I also have a JRT x from a shelter. I had hoped to trial with both of them, but if I register them it means I can never again compete with a shelter dog, and I WAS planning on getting shelter dogs in the future as well. But now it seems the options are to either get a shelter dog, OR be able to trial. How is that fair? If you want to do agility there is ADAA agility in QLD, they do not care what breed or mix your dog is.

As I understand it, the idea is to have a total change from a closed stud book system to an open stud book system. This would allow for constant flow of new blood into all the breed stud books. It is not about addressing a certain problem, or a breeder having a certain plan approved by the breed club. I think if over the past 20 years, that had been many openings of stud books in many breeds, addressing breeds with high COI's or health or structure problems as you said some sort of plan and the more obvious breeds were now opened up to their larger populations outside the KC (like the WKC), then maybe the Open Stud Book system would not be the only choice being put on offer. But I think now it has reached the point of, too little too late, so now the only option is the Open stud book system, at least from what I see happening. But can I ask, if you those who are keeping your lines closed and do not open up your line to even the current stud book dogs, then as you said the other day, it would have no effect on you. What I think needs to be explored is the idea that not every body has to breed dogs with in a breed the same way. Some breeders can keep their lines closed if they want. Others can open up their lines using the 3 generation system if they want. This makes the total picture of greater flexibility in types of breeding plans and therefore population of dogs are much more diverse, which can be viewed as a positive by the members and by society. What I am afraid of, is that after these Open stud books are put into place like it or not, that no one will use them. (Peer pressure and attacks as we have seen on this thread will put off many who might have liked too, which I think is not only sad but also shameful). Then with no progress made towards change, what will be said next is, 'we gave them the tools for change and they refused to change their ways, so now we close down the whole system'.

I have read it. In the response to the Bateson Report, I also noted this statement by the The Kennel Club. Perhaps you missed it? If you're going to tout the Kennel Club's actions as the way of the future, best you note that limitation on what they propose. No "across the board" system there that I can see. And strangely, that point is one that I and others have been making all along. Go figure. Well you just keep figureing.

Actaully it was the breed clubs that prevented it. And I am sure that is why the open stud book has nothing to do with consulting with the breed clubs, it is across the board to prevent this from every happening again. I also think the government has a very big gun to the KC's head and it really is now a case of our way or the highway. I mma so very sure (my crystal ball has been dusted off and is working very well) they are gearing up to have some sort of control on inbreeding levels which will use the Mate Select system.

I think dogs are not mice either. So really only dogs (unless it proves my point and the all rules of fair play are out! LOL).

Opps sorry did not see this. Yes the very best example I can give is, every single breed in The Kennel Club UK is in an open stud book. Meaning what exactly.. that every breeder can outcross to whatever they want whenever they want for any purpose deemed desireable? Or do Breed Clubs have something to say about that? Why don't you read it for yourself. It says that any dogs that looks like the breed and passes the required health tests can be registered. It is a 3 genertion appedix system (just like what the WKC uses that I sugested folks look at) that brings the dogs in to main registration status, or perhaps you would want to say 'now considered purebred'. There has already been an amendment, that allows working trial judges to look at the working breeds if the owner requests that, so they do not get exclude, as working dogs often have a body type very different from the show lines. So this means that smooth coated border collie on the paddock down the road can enter the UK border collie stud book and then the 3 generation could come back into our stud book. So it seems rather silly to keep them out any more, it would be better to control our own intergration system. However we can just dig in and wait for the RSPCA and Governement to push our kennel club to do the same system they are doing in the UK, across the board, all breeds and no one talks to the parent. And guess what, after this conversation I will now just support the across the board system, it is just too hard to try to get anything else even talked about, never mind done. And no, the breed clubs have no say in the matter they cannot stop anyone from bringing in a dog. Why you ask? Because everyone knows it would take another 30 years and 24 generations to bring in a dog free of a disease that every KC registerd dog has, and only then under huge diress. Game is over. We need to face it and deal with it and denying that change is needed is only makeing it worse. The Gardener.

Not agreeing or disagreeing Steve but Australia is a damn big Country. And concidering alot of SS's statements arise from internet browsing, one just never knows which agenda SS is going by. Agenda ? Why does it matter? Healthy debate which pushes us to re assess what we think is a good thing surely? If OUR agenda is the betterment of the breeds and the dogs we personally breed then being challenged and having a place where we can belt it out - maybe even learn something is healthier than us staying in our comfort zones and stroking each other to PERHAPS justify mistakes we may have made and in advertently cause dogs to suffer when we can prevent that. The wolf thing is interesting but how does that relate to what is happening in my back yard when what is happening in the wolf study isnt what is happening in my back yard ? Purebred dog breeders dont breed their dogs in any way that a wolf colony breeds - for us or at least for me it isnt relavant . We select the mates based on the many things we take into account to try to breed the healthiest puppies and the husbandry methods we use in our loungerooms is hardly comparable in any way and surely by now we all know just as many studies done on inbreeding and natural selection to show a bit of ours. Which is exactly what I said. However making along list of species that inbreed, is no different from making a long list of animals that do not closely inbreed, and neither list proves it is good or bad for our dogs, as they are not those animals. More importantly it is all negated by the fact we do the selection not nature, so all bets are off. Personally I woudl sugest all human example not be used for a lot of reasons, the main one being that has been already used by PETA very sucessfully and I would never feed into that idea.

Opps sorry did not see this. Yes the very best example I can give is, every single breed in The Kennel Club UK is in an open stud book.

I thought I was the gardener? I make a good effort to keep the inbreeding as low as possible in my dogs.

Culling as in meaning not used for breeding. Would not culling poor examples help any breed, no matter that they are used for, be a good idea? Perhaps more culling of inferior dogs in the companion breeds might be an idea to explore. I would not say that issues for companion dogs are more complex than issues for working dogs. I have had a lot of experince placing dogs into companion homes, coming up to 30 years, so I think I am Ok to have an opinion about it.

Bryann..a open stud book can define and promote a breed, a breed does not need a clsoed stud book to exsist. There are many breeds that work with in open stud books. I have listed many of them before. One of the best example here in OZ is the Ozzie made working kelpie, see the WKC web site. It is an open stud book that allows outcrossing and back crossing. I would also say they have excellent breed type, but even more importantly excellent breed type in working traits. Tthis breed was well established and develope long ago and it continues to be well bred by the working community. A Ture Blue Aussie Job and very well done!

Just a note on HD. I have no idea what labxpoodle breeders are saying, but both those breeds get HD, so I would not expect any improvment. Besides HD is complex and even in crosses with Greys, it has not got rid of the HD, so we already know that cross breeding is not a quick fix for HD. I think expections in these conversations have to be inline with what is possible, and not keep using examples that there would no reasons to think that outcrossing whould ever help, never mind solve. For any dicussion to be relevant it has to be within what is possible and not keep using examples that are known as not possible as if this proves the whole idea is without value. Again I am saying that cross breeding or even just outcrossing to less related populations of the same breed (WKC as an example) is not a silver bullet for every woe known to dog. Bbut it can be very effective for simple recessives and in general improving vitality if you dare to believe that increasing genetic diversity and reducing inbreeding in general can only be a good thing as compared to reducing genetic diversity and increasing inbreeding. Note I did not say the anyone has to believe it or to cvhage the way they breed dogs. But for those who want to listen to what many experts are saying, there is no way to do it under a system that is definded by ever increasing inbreeding and ever decreasing genetic diversity. Other topic Here is a nice case history of back breeding. RetievermMan is an excllent blog and yet another example of a purebred dog breeder who can explore differnt ideas. http://retrieverman.wordpress.com/2011/02/05/how-backcrossing-works/ I was also just reading today that several purebred breeds have had several unoffical cross and back breedings done over the years. So it would seem that even some of the best kennels in the world have a second round of foundation cross/back bred dogs in the woodpile.

I agree with your wife, open stud books can have real positives! But you are right about your credentials. But even more damming, gossip has it you are the gardener! Anyway, my mind is now back on these new DNA tests which compare the genes in potential breedings, they are used to increase the diversity in a certain area of the DNA known to be involved in the immune system. They have also been use as a breed survey, to assess this area in the breed. This is sort of like trying to do anti-inbreeding while doing inbreeding in a closed stud book. My first reaction to the test was very negative, but I am starting to think it might be worth exploring. I guess a lot of people are already using these tests, purebred dog breeder in Europe and the US. It would be too soon to see what they feel the results have been in their breedings but certainly there is a big interest in this new pre breeding screening. The idea is you try to avoid crosses (don't panic... I mean crosses of 2 dogs of the same breed and both with ANKC registration done by an ANKC registered breeder) that would reduce the number of different genes and to look for crosses that will increase the number of different genes (select as much genetic diversity as possible) in this area of the DNA. I would personally like to think I am doing every thing I can to help my dogs have the best possible immune system. So am troting off to discuss this subject with another group of dog breeders. Here is a bit about it from one the complanies now offering these tests. http://www.genoscoper.com/in_english2/gene_tests/gene_tests/dla_diversity/ DLA diversity DLA diversity test to follow and maintain heterozygosity at MHC II locus Much of the genetic diversity of dogs is dimished or lost in many breeds due to aggressive breeding programs and closed inbred populations. Loss of genetic diversity threatens the welfare and vitality of dogs and may predispose them to various diseases. An important part of this genetic diversity is related to genes, which are responsible for the effective and functional immune defense against viruses, parasites and other foreign pathogens in dogs. There are probaly hundreds if not thousands of genes involved in the functionality of the immune system in mammalian genome. One of the most important such gene cluster is called major histocompatibility complex (MHC) in the dog’s genome. MHC complex includes a large number of genes and lies in canine chromosome 12. This MHC complex includes genes that are responsible for the recognition of the species own tissues from foreign material. Recognition is related to the genetic diversity and some of the genes in this region contain particulary hypervariable areas in their coding regions to maintain them as diverse as possible. The loss of diversity in the MHC region or inheritace of particular allele combinations may result in increased susceptibility to autoimmune diseases such as diabetes, atopia, hypothyroiditis and different forms of inflammatory disorders. Many canine autoimmune disorders have been already associated with risk haplotypes in the MHC locus and homozygosity to risk alleles or haplotypes seems to increase the disease risk. Heterozygosity is preferred in the MHC locus in wild population too. Several studies in both natural and domesticated populations underline the importance of heterozygosity rather than the numer of different haplotypes in the MHC region. We have now tools to type your dog’s MHC II genes (DLA typing) so that you can follow the diversity of your dogs and lines and use this information while planning new breedings. It is useful to have a DLA-profile from your breed in differnet countries since the frequency of the alleles in the MHC genes may vary a lot between populations. Once the DLA-profile is established you could compare your dog's profile for the overall breed' or line's profile and take it into account while planning new breedings. The aim is to maintain the heterozygosity of the MHC region as much as possible in the breeding lines. This should reduce the risk for autoimmune or other diseases. As a general rule it may be wise to avoid increasing homozygosity in the MHC locus containing a large number of important genes. There is a growing body of evidence that homozygosity in the MHC locus increases the risk for autoimmune disorders. Many of the published studies include rather small sample numbers. This has effects on the strength of the risk factors and significance levels. Larger studies in future should give more accurate risk estimates not available yet. However, it may be wise to choose a breeding partner that has different haplotypes to maintain heterozygosity and diversity in your litters and lines. Since MHC locus is functionally important it is not a neutral locus and lies under a selective pressures. Certain MHC haplotypes may not be allowed at all or may lead to inviablity. DLA-typing analyzes only the MHC locus in one chromosome, and although it provides important data that may also reflect the overall diversity of the breed, it is recommended for breeders to test also other markers from other chromosomes for comparison to better reflect the overall diversity of the breed. Due to selective pressures the diversity of the MHC locus may turn out to be more heterozygous than other part of the dog's genome. It is important to remember that several factors needs to be considered in breeding decisions and DLA-results are only one thing among many others. Breeding plans should never be based on only DLA-types or any other genetic tests. Breeding decisions needs to be made case by case. This is an increasing challenge in future with the growing number of genetic tests. Breeding against one locus may cause troubles in the other loci which are not known yet. Maintenance of the genetic diversity in the breed should be the key consideration in breeding plans. A good choice for this is to avoid inbreeding and keep the inbreeding coefficient as low as possible. This should also maintain the MHC locus heterozygous. DLA test can be only made from blood sample due to the complexity of the analysis that requires high quality DNA. DLA profiling service for Breed Clubs Before typing individual dog's it would be useful to have a public DLA-profile from the breed. Different breeds have different numbers of MHC II haplotypes based on the origin and history of the breeds and used breeding practices. The current DLA-profile of the breed can be known only by DLA typing. We provide DLA-profiling services for Breed Clubs. We suggest to type about 50-100 unrelated dogs provided by the owners or the Club. After the analysis, the Breed Club will get haplotype profiles and frequencies. This information can be used to advise better and healthier breeding habits. The DLA-profile service takes usually at least 2-3 months to complete. If your Club is interested in this service, please contact our Customer service. Several Clubs have already successully profiled their breeds with us.

Me: How many current breeds of dogs confront the same scenario - quoted from the article you've posted. If you're going to use that article to suggest that the situation that confronts most modern populations of purebred dogs is analogous, then you are simply wrong. Oh gees is right. Comparison of the genetic diversity in the two populations is ridiculous. Sorry but your credibility in this discussion is taking a dive here. The fact that you refuse to name your own breed ain't helping you. Gee is right, now calm down. This was said Why not study nature, all the animals and their way of keeping only the best and strongest of the lines etc. No one out there to tell them when to breed and with whom, they keep their lines very close. In I then made a post about natural selection and inbreeding, do all animals in nature 'kep their line very close" I do not think so and state such in the post above. You can read it above. So I went to look to see if wolves only naturally do tight inbreeding and avoid any mating to outsiders wolves, did not find that answer yet, but found the piece above about a small group of wolves inbreeding and it was also a case of natural selection. Please stop looking for trouble. Enjoy.

New term Genetic Rescue, make note to self. Here is a population of inbred wolves where there has been natural selection. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30042879/ns/us_news-environment/t/inbreeding-taking-toll-michigan-wolves/ Inbreeding taking a toll on wolves. The two dozen or so gray wolves that wander an island chain in northwestern Lake Superior are suffering from backbone malformations caused by genetic inbreeding, posing yet another challenge to their prospects for long-term survival, according to wildlife biologists. Although confirmed only recently, the problem apparently has been festering for decades in the small, isolated packs in Michigan's Isle Royale National Park. The abnormalities, also found in some domestic dogs, can cause pain and partial paralysis while limiting the range of motion so crucial for predators in the wild. The discovery raises the ethically thorny question of whether scientists should try to dilute the gene pool by introducing wolves from elsewhere, said researchers with Michigan Tech University in Houghton, which hosts a 51-year-old study of the island park's wolves and moose. It is among the world's longest continuing observations of symbiotic relationships between predator and prey species and their natural surroundings. Historically, biologists have taken a hands-off posture as wolf and moose numbers have risen and fallen, preferring to let nature take its course even if it meant extinction of one or both species. But strong arguments could be made for intervening as well, project leaders now say. "This is not a decision just for scientists to make any more," said Rolf Peterson, who has taken part in the study since 1970. The research team reported its findings this week in the current issue of the journal Biological Conservation and is soliciting public comments on its Web site. Although part of Michigan, Isle Royale is closer to Minnesota and Ontario. Moose found their way to the island probably by swimming the 15 miles from Canada around 1900. Two or three wolves arrived in the late 1940s, crossing a rare ice bridge from the mainland. Weather, food availability, disease and other factors have caused the two species' populations to fluctuate over the years. The most dangerous period for the wolves came in the 1980s, when their total dropped to 12 because of a parvovirus outbreak. Their population stood at 24 this winter, roughly the long-term average. They were divided into four packs. Scientists had long watched for problems from inbreeding, such as poor survival rates for pups. Instead, the first solid evidence surfaced when Jannikke Raikkonen of the Swedish Museum of National History, an expert in wolf anatomy, visited Isle Royale several years ago to examine the project's bone collection. She identified malformed vertebrae in all wolf remains found the previous dozen years. Such abnormalities show up in just 1 percent of observed populations that are not inbred. Peterson and biologist John Vucetich found two dead wolves this winter with misshapen vertebrae. One had been killed by fellow wolves. The other had unusually severe arthritis for its age and a neck injury suggesting a moose kick. The bone malformation may have lessened its ability to dodge the lethal blow, Vucetich said. Living on the edge Spinal malformation from inbreeding poses no immediate threat of extinction, Peterson said. The biggest short-term problem is a drop-off in moose, the wolves' primary food supply, which scientists attribute to climate change. This winter's moose census turned up 530 only about half their long-term average and a drop-off from last year's estimated 650. But inbreeding joins the list of reasons why the wolves will always be living on the edge, one disaster away from disappearing, Vucetich said. "It just makes everything a heck of a lot more complicated," he said. The study team is considering whether to propose a "genetic rescue" trapping unrelated mainland wolves and bringing them to Isle Royale, hoping they would breed and mix their genes with the existing population. The question involves competing scientific and ethical values, Vucetich said. Opponents of intervention believe humans should not tinker with wilderness systems. Even if Isle Royale's wolves die out, their loss would provide information that could save endangered species elsewhere. Other would counter that attempting to save the wolves also could yield valuable data, while sparing individual animals from painful bone deformities. "We have an incomplete understanding of genetic rescue when and how and why it works," Vucetich said. "Even so, it may be an important conservation tool as more population species become rare." Me, Do we see a new field of studies on purebred dogs, 'genetic rescue' on inbred populations of dogs. Oh gees.

Just a couple of big problems with that idea. Firstly there is a huge range of levels of reproduction methods, from self fertilization to no family inbreeding at all. A dog is not a plant, and it is not a worm and it is not mouse. So when it comes to natural reproduction the choices are specific to each animal or plant. How you would determine what the natural method would be in man made domestic dogs is another matter, and I have no idea. Look at wolves perhaps or even dingos might be better, really I have no idea. Second problem is in nature there is only natural selection. Not the artificial selection to meet an artificial breed standard that we do with purebred dogs. Dogs are man made and this changes everything. However we already know what happens when you let a bunch of purebred dog breeds run wild for a few generations and let nature make the choices, the resulting feral pups will basically become moderate, med sized, mobile eared, nicely proportioned basic generic mutts. Thirdly many of the traits we select for that make a breed what it is, would never be selected for in nature. Nature will only keep what works, normal mouths, normal noses, normal skin and so forth. If a dog had to really hunt for it's own food I think you can imagine what would happen to many of our breeds. So if we want to follow nature in real selection of the fittest then we would have to totally change what we expect to find in our dogs. I think there is merit in this, but this would not be an acceptable idea. So I do not think we can pretend that we can ever mimic natural breeding and natural selection. Even if you could prove that dogs or perhaps wolves would actually choose to only inbred very closely and would shun all other members of their species in nature (which I do not think would be the case but too tired to look it up). We still could not mimic which dogs would be selected in nature, but for sure many of breeds would not make the 'natrual selection' cut. What we are doing with dog breeds does not come any where close to what happens with natural selection.

About time! Was watching a US TV channel and they had an TV ad for Pet Airways.

I never said that all purebred dogs were sick, I do say they are all inbred by the very nature of closed stud books. I never said that outcrossing was magic bullet for all health problems and infact said several times I did not say or believe that, only to have you imply that I said it again. So no problem to me, here it is one more time. Outcrossing and cross breeding is not a silver bullet for all health problems. It works very well for simple recessive diseases it would help if applied correctly, certainly closed stud books do not help with these diseases at all. It should be in a our tool box and effort should made to assure this happens. Like it or not these topics are not going away. Currently UK KC has now made it possible for their breeders to lower their inbreeding levels for the first time in who knows how long, I applaud them for that. I have just heard that some of the KC in Europe will be following with their own programs. It's not going away. I also noted this morning in the UK that several breeders had on their web sites that they were using the new Mate select and had written a bit about inbreeding and their desire to reduce in their breed and in their litters and had the COI posted for the parents and their litter. These were KC Accredited Breeders and were doing all the right things, health testing and showed their dogs, they look like very good caring breeder to me. It's not going away. So now I am going out to do some pruning. (That is gardening, and why they call me the gardener opps I mean The Stig.)

I read this on the AKC web site for Neos which explains the use of inbreeding in the Neo breed. The Mastino's type, its unique appearance, was created in the Neapolitan countryside by years of inbreeding. As a result, the traits that make the Mastino an unusual dog: its wrinkles, dewlap, loose skin, enormous bone, and distinct lumbering gait, are created by an accumulation of recessive genes. To breed a sound dog with these attributes is truly an art...and a challenge. From the AKC 2010 Neo National Specialty

Only if you equate inbreeding and ANKC as the same thing. I see it is disucssing some current issue in dog breeding that seem to be very uncomfrotable for a few people, to the point they make personal attacks. I do not find that amusing.

i wasn't thinking of the gardener i was thinking SS sounds alot like someone i used to debate the same subjects with a very long time ago on here infact. sounds very similar to this other person that use to frequent the boards. perhaps they have come back under a new name? we still don't know who this person is, they aint telling us. You have to love the front of someone who doesn't breed ANKC dogs telling the ANKC people how it should be done I breed ANKC dogs, and even if I did not, I still have every right to voice an opinion, without personal attack. Now leaving that aside and back on to topic. So you are pretty sure that even if ANKC opens their stud books no breeder would ever use any thing but an exsisting ANKC regsitered dog. See I think the The KC did this becasue of the Bateson report, sort of like it is time to change or we are going to close you down nudge nudge. I see the open stud book as needed for some breeds to survive the transition I see coming next. This also ties in with the Mate Select and the inbreeding calcuator which also have just been released. I am thinking they are going to make rules about the amount of inbreeding allowed. Some breeds will have to look to these new dogs in order lower their inbreeding enough to quaify, other breeds might get by for a time, but any influx of new dogs would help to lower the over all breed inbreeding level. Now this is all just a guess on my part, but they are certainly putting in all the systems needed to do this sort of monitoring of inbreeding on litters. Anyway if nothing else I see it is the most important change to have happened in kennel club breeding in the past 50-100 years. Clearly something that deserves lots of dicussion even if there is not a single breeder in ANKC would ever admit in public to considering trying to lower their inbreeding levels for fear of being called a gardner (and we all know how bad that is)!

Here Jo, this is one copy that the Gardner and the UK kennel club have put into action, but this is not the latest edition. One change is that now working judges can also check the dog for breed type, this is to prevent working dogs from being accidently exculded since they often have a different apperence to show type. A pilot scheme which could enhance genetic diversity has been announced by the Kennel Club. It will allow purebred unregistered dogs to be registered on the Breed Register on a case by case basis. This is a return to the position which existed forty years ago when similar rules were in force. Enhancing genetic diversity The move, approved by the Kennel Club General Committee last year, will if used, enhance genetic diversity by widening breed gene pools and allowing new bloodlines to be introduced within breeds. Under the new pilot scheme, every successful application will be admitted to the register with three asterisks next to its name. Asterisks will be applied for three further generations, in order to identify the fact that there is unknown or unregistered ancestry behind a dog. How to apply Applications will need to be accompanied by a letter of explanation of how the applicant acquired the dogand will then only be considered on the proviso that the dog: a) is verified by two Championship level judges appointed by the Kennel Club who should agree that the dog is representative of its breed. b) is DNA profiled. c) has relevant health tests (equivalent to that required and recommended under the Kennel Club Accredited Breeder Scheme) for the breed. Breed specific health requirements under the ABS can be viewed at www.thekennelclub.org.uk/breedhealth. To ensure that only genuine applicants apply, strict requirements have been put in place that will need to be completed before an application is finally approved by the Committee, and in addition there will be an administration fee of £100 per dog. Every application will be considered on a case by case basis. Whilst the Kennel Club is keen to open up its register, it should be noted that there is no guarantee that dogs so registered (and their progeny) will be accepted for registration by overseas registering bodies. That will depend upon their local regulations. Application forms are available direct from the Registration Office on 0844 4633 980 ENDS [125.11] 19th April 2011 Notes to Editors If a dog of unknown origin is accepted on the Breed Register, the dogs registration will be annotated by three asterisks to indicate unverified origins. If it is bred from and mated to other fully registered dogs of the same breed (with no asterisks next to their name), their progeny, the F1 progeny, will also be annotated with three asterisks. If the F1 progeny are bred from, and mated to other fully registered dogs of the agreed breed (with no asterisks against their name), their progeny, the F2 progeny, will be annotated with two asterisks. F2 progeny mated to fully registered dogs of the agreed breed (with no asterisks against their name), will produce F3 progeny that will be registered with one asterisk. The F4 and subsequent generations will have no special annotation.

Jo, have you read what the UK Kennel club has done with reguard to opening their stud book?

So toydog, what do you thinkof the British Kennel club haveing done this, they are now an open stud book for all breeds including chi, any dogs that looks like the breed passes any maditory health tests will be registered, 3 generations later the pups are full KC registration ready for export to OZ!