moosmum

Some solutions- Not that I expect ANKC will implement any, or that they would support even those not aimed specifically in their direction while they feel it could benefit breeding beyond their membership. 1. No 'penalty' fee for entire dogs, but all must, have comprehensive genetic testing for health and breed. Available on public record on request. Linked with chip no. Reason- Any legally kept dog capable of procreating will have have some known genetic history. Even if only one parent is known, there will be at least a partial understanding of possible risks to offspring for both the owner and any purchasers. Liability for faulty or compromised pups by breeders only where due care not taken taken from use of existing information and genetic availability. This puts equal responsibility for all pups sold with their breeders and purchasers, enhancing the ability to respond, and making that knowledge implicit to either action. The more reputable testing facilities are provided a much greater base to draw on for future research, and/or testing to aid in increasing its comprehension. 2. Life time registrations in all states for a once only fee attached to ownership of dogs, with a single national data base Reason- To make registration and compliance simpler and more affordable, and access to information contained more easily accessible with a single source and regulatory system. 3. Said data base to provide service, not just demands, in the form of a) a Breeding registry to cover all purposes in breeding. b) a public forum similar to DOL for discussion and dissemination of all things dog related including research and proposed legislation for public discussion education and dissemination. This could be overseen by either invested member of the public or paid for by advertisers, but remain unbiased and focused on education over censure as a resource available to anyone. regardless of their circumstance. Help 1st. Mistakes, no matter how ignorant, will be having a cost already and others will learn from the examples given.c) To provide an advertising media for all things dog related. This would include litters, adult dogs rescues and pounds. These would be listed under purpose. ie; Rescue, pound, Pedigree standards, Apartment living, childrens, family or elderly companions, work descriptions or even accidental.etc. Reason- Information should be easily and readily accessible with a common source to unite all aspects/stake holders in the purpose of keeping and breeding dogs or the the welfare issues training and assimilation surrounding those practices in and to the community. Promotes a better understanding of the inter relationships of these practices and promotes alternative or undiscovered perspectives that could benefit other 'fields'. Dog ownership is multi billion $ industry and the stake holders would be supporting it more effectively with advertisement monies funding its growth responsibly and sustainably through funding the establishment of a body dedicated to the purpose. Listing Dogs for sale according to purpose establishes that there is expectation there be one, apart from from profit. That profit only comes with 1st providing a value,(companion, work, and for what situation?) and what what value you are seeking from dog ownership also needs consideration. The sites people use for advertising are not the problem- but divided systems provide no ability for common expectations of responsibility to be informed. And, ANKC specific solutions where I believe resistance may be impossible to over come and fail us all: 4) The ANKCs to formally accept recognition of dogs not bred according to to either Pedigree standards or closed Pedigrees- Cross breed dogs. Even if they have to break from other bodies to do so. Reason- This is essential 1st to their own survival, and that of the breeds whos pedigrees they do record, but also to any hope of establishing that there can be such a thing as expectations held in common for responsible breeding and keeping of dogs. It would in no way impact the way their own system of registering pedigrees operates, nor or the 'purity' of those, except by creating a more accepting membership of practices for which they have no stake in unless by said common expectation. More open to solutions for existing problems within that might not require placing further restrictions or barriers to either membership or genetic diversity. Allows the implication that Pedigree standards are kept for the purpose of dogs- Not the other way around. 5) ANKCs to establish separate registries specifically for the purpose of recording appendix registered dogs where only one parent might have a pedigree under their rules and regs. This to be kept separate from the breed standards/clubs. Reason- This opens up membership to possibilities, and re-enforcement of the recognition given. It provides a 'control group' to measure and recognize the effectiveness of the 'closed' registers, and the solutions being implemented for 'improvement' and their effectiveness against what the environment is actually demanding. Enforces recognition of environment to their success and the support afforded them. Allows for more diverse and increased membership , which may also help to drive down associated costs and impositions. A 'control group', and possible ready source for out crossing where/if thats deemed needed by breed clubs. opens up communication and information sharing between ANKC and environment where each can benefit from the other. I believe this 'drastic' action which I expect to be rejected is only but desperately needed due to the damage already done over nearly 200 years now, and may have been instigated my membership long ago if environmental recognition had not been ruled out of their 'constitution' - their genetic instruction if you will. Will it happen? I doubt it, and we've run out of time for debate. I doubt I can do more. But I've taken the responsibility I've earned to try, and will place further efforts else where than ANKC. Faith is too hard to over come. , 6. No further legislation for a minimum of 10 years. Reason- To allow affects of the new systems to be felt, assessed and most effectively co-ordinated so that stake holders have a better understanding of their own responsibilities in regards to any legislation proposed, the means to be aware of it and any implications, and to make informed response. These proposals are informed by many years of informal research and an intimate understanding of the root causes for the current situation. They are based on sound biological principles of purpose, responsibility, and the role of environment in informing those expectations. The oppositional systems in play at present will not allow responsibility, while the environment is not recognized wholly and equally. All parts are equal to the equation, or it can't achieve definition. Even if the values contributed are not equal to each other, they are to any definition achievable. 1 +3+1+ 5 achieve a definition of 10. The Objective they serve. Five has more value, but 10 is not achieved with out the least value of 1. If there is no 1, there is no foundation to support the existence of 5 of them. 10 has no value of its own as the Objective. It only exists because of the values brought by its subjective constituency. Its built on the foundations they provided. deleateing the constituency of 10 to 5 because it carries greater value does not serve the Objective. 2 x 5 no longer works either, because there is no foundation to support. 5, or 10. They can't exist in a vacuum. Without the environmental foundations in place. Thats just reality folks. Built from the bottom up. Form follows function- is emergent from it. Reduce the functoning parts and it doesn't

We should be doing much better, all 'round. I can understand DonnaMairee too, so the apology at my frustration. But there are breeders with genuine and worth while goals who health test amongst them getting discredited under that banner and so finding it impossible to get any credit nor being held up as better examples- Which is how people decide to emulate and improvement happens. No one has the perfect set ups or outcomes, look and you will find fault. And thats what we are training to look for. We promote fault in breeders to such an extent no one can raise their head for notice with out it being shot at. There should be no "stuck between". Its one space here, of people who want dogs in their lives in one capacity or another. Its in bad shape. But its what we have. We can recognize that, and improve it, which means value adding. Or we can keep refusing to understand its all one space we share, and trying to delete our way to a pure state. Discard value. One way works and the other leads to nothing worth having anymore. Basic biology and evolutionary science teaches us that. Those same laws are repeated in social science. Recognize your environment and show your value to gain favor, or attack. People are for the most part trying to do the best they can. It falls woefully short, no argument. Ignorance comes easy when information is with held. It absolutely is. Breeders- because thats what they are when they breed dogs, are berated, ridiculed and abused for their ignorance. And learn nothing but 'Don't ask, Don't touch. You don't have what we want and never can'. A great show of response -abilty in that! I do understand the sheer magnitude of ignorance can be over whelming. Thats our collective fault that there is so little familiarity that even the best display it beyond their own fields, often just as overwhelmingly. Because we refuse to accept things can actually be other than what we know of our own. There are solutions, but so little time left to implement them and there needs to be a huge paradigm shift before they will be. This process has been underway for too long already, and it gains momentum at an incredible rate since we have set up all the conditions needed to end it.

I can promise you 'weeding out' poor practices with restrictions on who can breed and under what conditions is not going to lead to better outcomes. Nor will trying trying to distance ourselves from poor practices. They are driven to fail by that approach. We all are. There is no responsibility being taken in that approach. Only a denial of any ability to respond. Provide the tools to do better, and the encouragement and example to use them. If you want such a thing as a credible dog breeder, take responsibility for enabling that, not just 'Pedigrees'. Pedigrees have their own set of problems. There was a thing or 2 to be learned from the other side, before it was driven into chaos by discrediting any who try to bring credibility outside the pedigree system. Where do you think most of the breeds in existence today came from? And for the most part with far fewer health issues, greater longevity, better adaptability to the environments they were expected to fill. How much more could have been accomplished with the modern technology and science available, if it was encouraged to be used out side the pedigree system? If dog breeder meant only what is implicit by definition, and there was such a thing as common expectation of responsibility to that Objective? Pedigrees will be gone before your dream comes true. They will not survive with their foundations knocked out from under. Time to try some thing different. 'Same old' is insanity. Its not reality. I promise I can argue that point while you go in circles. Apologies for the sheer frustration coming through.

Yes, it is. But how it works is demonstrated by our use of mathematics to model reality and supported by all known laws of physics including biophysics and evolutionary science. The foundations that domestic dogs were built on are being systematically eliminated. The supports that allow them. We discredit them from the equation. Disallowed. Because we can't recognize where the value actually lies. Use and understanding of known Pedigrees can lead to improved dog breeding, but they do NOT decide the value of a dog. Its 'validity'.

Nor ANKC, whos members have played a huge part in this result in their attempts to fulfill the Objectives as set out in the whole of their written intention and constitution. The reason? Its not based on reality. Value is subjective. All of it. ANKC attached the value of a K9 to their Objective. The Objective is value negative. Any value attached the objective can only be expressed in the negative. In language, its created a double negative. The objective can't achieve definition, because you can't DEFINE it. Not when a 'good dog' or an 'improved' dog is defined by a pedigree standard. They are not the same thing. All this, from a faith based statement that refuses recognition of cross breed dogs to place the value of a dog into its pedigree. I set out years ago to solve this riddle, and spent the last few on the science forums to test and fully understand it, back to its mathematical formulae, and did it. Its not what I thought I had. I doubt I will get anyone to believe it, but it works. In every instance to which its been applied. It has not been able to be falsified. The duality of the Objective and subjective realities and the basic laws governing our use of mathematics, language, biology, science etc. All 'states' are in decline. The only 'pure' state is nothing. If you can't define the objective state, but any purpose is subverted to its maintainance, it will only be achieved when you have nothing. Because anything that doesn't belong by definition must be eliminated. Anything not recognized to support the state AS recognized... must be a foreign state to be eliminated. Hence the organism dies, eventually, while its species continues to evolve. Self imposed eugenics. By by dogs!

I'm sure life time registration rather than yearly would see more compliance. The higher fee for entire dogs makes sense, but I feel should could be lowered if all entire Dogs were asked to 1st have DNA health/breed testing results attached to microchip records. This would ensure all (council registered) Dog owners have at least some understanding of what they have and its potential risks in unplanned or random random breeding. It gives more responsibility to those keeping entire dogs, and those who might buy them. If such information is automatically available , it promotes the mutual expectation between buyers and sellers that it matters and should be used.

@Little Gifts If you read the last few posts of Adriennes posting history, you will get better context. She has been a respected member here. And I suspect not in the best place to handle responses where she feels her personal situation is irrelevant. Wishing you an out come you are happy with @Adrienne

Defeatist, when there is so much that can be done. Could start by joining ACA . Not just breeders, but state bodies, for a voice. And Stop discrediting breeders, weather they be ANKC or 'other'. There are solutions, but little support when the expectation on Breeders is they prove they aren't part of the problem, while there can be no real distinction between 'types' of breeders that can ever be claimed exclusively. You really do reap what you sow.

Poor little boy. Child proof enclosure would have prevented this, but I think the parents in this instance should be held more to account than the dogs owners, who at least ensured their dogs were secured in a private area and moved to a safer one away from where the child was originally. Training for owners of large/more risky breeds if undertaken should include public awarness. We have licensing for motor vehicles, but safety education around them extends to the general public.

Ban the people from participation if they won't do the right thing, or cover up for those who don't. Use the laws in place, and demonstrate/highlight better out comes for those who DO things well. Organisms and organizations evolve and thrive when they can demonstrate value. Poor behavior and out comes are Subjective, not objective. Unfortunately, ANKC has been promoting the opposing belief for too long and these instances of banning practices out right instead of demonstrating how they can be improved on is the only out come available under that assumption. Its contrary to reality. The objective is not faulty. Its not where the value is. If it were, we are all headed the same way.

I don't think it is a good move, if the answer to deficits is to scrap the whole thing. Doesn't bode well for the keeping of domestic animals. Not when the focus is constantly on discrediting the practice, and promotion of its successes inevitably cops the same treatment.

I don't think it is a good move, if the answer to deficits is to scrap the whole thing. Doesn't bode well for the keeping of domestic animals. Not when the focus is constantly on discrediting the practice, and promotion of its successes inevitably cops the same treatment.

These days, Thai Ridgeback and Kangal. Kangals are out of the question at my age, have way too much hair and neither breed at all suited to the environment I could provide. Way too risky! There have been so many other breeds I have liked at various stages though, from Lakeland Terriers to Akitas Airerdales and Giant Schnauzer or Black Russian terriers.

As above. Argue you have not had duty of care for an entire Dog in this instance. The fee you are being asked to pay is for an entire dog, and thats not what you took delivery of, nor should you be responsible for a late fee if that duty of care was undertaken in a reasonable time frame of accepting delivery.

Happy to say 'Done' T.