eyeopener

I am not sure what teh name is now but Monica's Rescue's or Doggy Rescue, she lived out northern Sydney way before having so many issues she had to get out of the area due to noise etc compliants. She just thought everything was saveable & maybe these days if she is still in rescue she has learnt from her time in the game, but back then no dog could be pts as she would say over & oevr again I am a no kill shelter. This Rotti bitch was a lovely bitch but she was so reactive & with fear aggression on top she was atime bomb & could have the most stable group of dogs in a frenzy over the straniest unavoidable & unreasdable sitituations. And if that wasn't scary enough in sitituations of high stimulation or fear she had a habit of snapping out at the closest person or animals she wasn't picky that way.

I did say old n cranky, lol... I do agree function & how a dog look do go hand in hand & I it's not all breeds but some have lost the functional type & thats what gets me the most I guess. I think you misunderstand my problem with colour i dont believe dogs should be penalised for a colour thats known to be a breed colour just because its seen as not disirable. But I do also not like any breeding based on any trait alone as it's another fast way to further narrowing gene pools 7 other more important traits will be lost. I know a few show breeders who deff breed to suit teh market on several levels whether it be the most saleable colours, coat tpes or type etc. just with any group you get you bad with your good. I do know several show breeders who I would say are the very top of my idea on doing the best possible to achieve thier goals whilst really doing anything of any use for the breed it's self. I just dont see things as black n white as i once did.

Pretty much everything you want is possible with the ANKC, if MEMBERS push for it. They can do so through the breed clubs or the state canine controls. The ANKC doesn't receive submissions directly. The precedent for opening breed registries for outcrossing is well established if the need to do so is demonstrated. Working gundog breeders register their dogs with the ANKC even though they don't often show them - but they do compete with them in ANKC sanctioned performance trials. You can register for ANKC performance events with a dog recognised through other registries - the ISDS and the WKC are cases in point. I have no idea where you have gotten the idea that "if you don't show you shouldn't breed" is the motto of the ANKC. It simply isn't the case. However if you don't show and all you do is breed the dogs you own and you never test them against any external set of criteria, then that's hardly in the interest of breed bloodlines either IMO. I dont mind putting my dogs against other breeders examples of the breed but I dont think the show ring is teh place for it & would prefer a more work based approach or just a general metting area to share ideas & check out each others dogs & talk about recent working/sporting achievements may do just as well. Imho the show ring puts too much on looks & the dogs presentation without taking function, correct function for a breeds origanal purpose, health or working ability, temperment or ethic into account at all. Seems abit of a wasted win to me sorry. I will be first to rejoin when I see the changes are even likely & would help in any way possible but I will not rejoin until then as I am too old n cranky these days.

I agree the judges do have some respondsability but it not all up to them, although it dose bug me no end to see over the top types put up time & time again in many breeds. But a big part is breeders breeding what they know will sell & the public are demanding different n bigger than big or smaller than small. But you know what if they where not given the choise they would just have to stick with a good individual example of the breed or go get a mutt. I also hate hearing over & over again what a good strong litter with all looking so similar, too me thats just a sign of narrowing gene pools. We should just realise that yes there is differing types within a breed & not every individual dog will fit breed height or weight just so either & embrace the dogs individuality. But no we wont cookie cutter litters & everyone to be show ring perfect etc etc.... Yep I know by now you are all thinking where did this nutter come from...

But thier pedigrees are not seen as relevent to the mainstream & this is what i mean about the need to work togtehr in some way. yes & true I guess it's the morals behind teh breeder at the end of the day not thier goals.

You have a pretty jaded view of the ANKC. ANKC pedigrees are starting to hold health results. Some litters can't be registered unless parents have been tested and results recorded. There are plenty of ANKC breeders who think health, soundness and temperament are as important as type. And the ANKC works with and contributes funding to the development of health testing and health research in dogs. All a second registry will do is divide memberships in an already dwindling purebred dog fancy. There aren't a heap of unregistered breeders out there just itching for a new registry to start up and collect the rafts of health results they've got on their breeding dogs over the years. I'd rather "fix" the registry we have where fixing is required than start over. Of course while people aren't prepared to step up and be part of the changes then we'll get what we've always got. The ANKC ain't perfect but as I see it its the best registry we have for purebred dogs and the changes folk want aren't insurmountable. Of course you have to build the willingness to change at the breed level first. How any registry would have the resources to do regular kennel inspections is an interesting point - and they'd want to be well funded for all the legal challenges to refusal of membership/breeders prefixes. You have a very valid point but I am afraid I just cant see ANKC accepting methods to suit all breeders goals anytime soon. I know reg checks on all breeders would be too much but random checks & following through & checking up on breeders other members & the general public alert you to having certian issues would be a very good place to start. I really belief there needs to be a registry thats pedigrees are acceptable to other mainstream registries that are willing to look after those wanting to breed more for health, function, work ability/ethic above type & coat colour, that believe it is possible to introduce new blood to bottle necked breeds if done correctly, that dosn't have a problem with re establishing near lost breeds or unregconised breeds. If the ANKC could see it within themselves to work alongside a registry like this so health results, pedgrees & information can be freely shared i think it would be a huge step forward. But I can not see that happening whilst ever we are still hearing the old well they shouldnt breed if they dont show line being trotted out, should be they shouldnt breed if not willing to take the respondaability of that pups housing & welfare for it's life instead. Why is this relevent to the question asked because so many said the only purebreed is a dog with reg from ANKC & to me that show the very point i am trying to make here, some people know more about what they have been told than the actuakl truth.

Yes I agree abpout not being able to tell by eye alone,I just cut it down in my distription, as we have breed up several livestock breeds & know how a F1 to F5 breed up to pure goes. The worst part of that story(unhealthy dog to be rebreed etc) is it isnt uncomman in anyway & whilst ribbons come before health it will continue to happen. I am not against all show breeders & think they can when health is at the forefront of thier mind have great results with thier dogs. But results for me means, temperment,health & work or sporting ability not ribbons won or amount of litters bred. I used to show & breed to show so my eyes are wide open & I have to say I sleep better now that I have decided to change the goal posts for my dogs. I understand what your saying here & agree fully as I know you could not tell differnce between my F3 n pure sheep of a certain breed but I know as I keep detailed records. This is where I see room for a second registry as I would rather a body handle my pedigrees that where willing to hold health results & actually know the conditions thier breeders dogs are living in. i wont a registry that cares if someones dogs are kennel 24/7, I want a registry about sharing health & genetic testing results, that thinks health, function stuctural soundness & temperment/work ability are more important than type & ribbons etc. Thats where it comes to the pointy part for me, who do I trust to hold these records because I am telling you know for good reason I dont trust AKC etc. So for the time being I will hold my own records with help of an overseas registry & hope that 1 day I will have a choise that wont be looked down upon by the main stream. As I see it I dont want show dogs so why registry with a body that puts show ribbons above my pet cause health. Not many breeders have a clue about genetic health at all I am afraid. I think genetic testing & using the info gained in a non reactive but throught through manner is what is needed badley.

I used to many years ago do foster & retraining mainly of large breeds for a Sydney rescue but after twice coming to blows with the owner over me suggesting a dog was unfixable & a danger to anyone you placed her with so need pts i had to quit as i could not live with myself knowing how potentally dangerous some of the dogs could be. The bitch that brought it all to a head was the type who was so fetr aggressive she would set off a whole stable pack with just her presence, bite my sister over nothing & when I said i was having her pts she was removed from my care & kileld a small breed dog. this bitch wasd still rehome in a 1 dog household but it only laster 3w3ks when she had 1 of her manic aggressive attacks 7 attacked thier brother who was visiting & they had her pts FINALLY once I got in contact & asured them it was not them but the dog. As the rescue even tried blaming them.

I agree with this - to a point. I breed purebred dogs with registered pedigrees in order to enable me to keep accurate records and pass that onto those who need such info to breed better dogs - but it makes no difference to me if someone has different goals , goes about things in a different way etc. I agree pedigrees are important, VERY important I only disagree that there will only ever be 1 registry capable of handling this as I see a large area for a trustable body to hold pedigrees & health results totally independantly from Australian canine Assocation etc. I think they are too hung up on breeding to breed standards that are inturpretated to put type before function & health. I dont agree dog showing is in the best interest of all breeds either & would rather see competions & displays that concerntrate more on working & sporting goals. When everyone thinks the same , breeds the same way restricts bloodlines and really do expect that what they like is what everyone should like it isnt necessarily what is best for the dogs. Backyard breeders dont get everything right but what they do impacts what they breed not thousands of dogs into the future. Yes I agree fully, I may have a different idea of what a back yard breeder is than you though as there is no way i would call an old mentior of mine a backyard breeder but many would as he is unregistered & breeds working dogs based on work ability health & function with no thought given to type other than function. He would have any dog he breed sold well before it came of age & many he ran on & trained & sold for quite large sums of money for an unreg working dog back then. His dogs are still seen s as the creme of the drovers dogs crop to this day & he died some 20yrs ago. When you get everyone breeding for what is a winning look in the ring even though they are testing and trying to get it right if it goes belly up there isnt anywhere to go to help the breed. Years ago people were able to simply buy a purebred papered puppy and have a couple of litters with a good stud dog when the need arose - they weren't interested in showing or breeding on for a couple of decades but it gave us a gene pool we could go back to dip into etc if we got into trouble. In the main people accepted a purebred had papers but papered dogs were in bigger supply and people were encouraged to breed them. Breeders sold them puppies which they didnt feel would do the breed any harm if they were bred with and there was no expectation for them to breed anything other than pet puppies. Part of that was that we didnt have any such thing as a limited register - if you didnt want a puppy to breed with you didnt get papers at most you got a copy of the papers. Progress isn't necessarily a good thing but in order to work that out we have to stop defending what we do long enough to truly analyse it and honestly consider what is best for the dogs and the people who will own them. We really should do that a bout now before the numbers ensure we are extinct. i think we may agree in many ways just see things from a different angle at times, a very refreshing thing. i think narrow gene pools are a very scarry future for many breeds & i also think fad breeding for that show ring look could be 1 of the sacriest parts of that of all.

I won't leave large & giant breeds alone with a play mate of any size untill around a year old or more unless in a small enough area I know they wont be wrestling & jumping over each other just to aviod any stuctural damage to growing joints & to protect thier young ligiments. I tend to leave that age group with an older quite non player if they need unsupervised company & other than that they can play together when I am home but have safe day run areas they can be kept if not. Maybe extend her amount of room by making her an outdoor day run with a shaded area etc where she can interact through the mesh with your other dog while your out also. I also prefer to not allow my youngsters to much unstuctured & unsupervised free time to develope bad habits like barking & destroying gardens & furniture as it's easy to address if ur there not so much if your away at work & your teenager dog knows it.

It really is a question of what 1's beliefs are but in the magority of educated peoples opinions a purebreed is the offspring of 2 dogs of the same breed which goes on to breed true to breed type consistantly themselves. Everything else is a question of proof of the animals breeding really. I really think people are very small minded to think there is only 1 true & correct way to breed & still be breeding with all the right intentions. I dont think it is in the best interest of all breeds to only have bloodlines continued on through the australian canine council & thier state registries, i believe they play an important part but should not be the 1 n only. I honestly belief 1 day some of these people breeding purebreeds based on temperments true to breed(not just what works best in the show ring), health, work ability/ethic n drive above type may be asked to contribute bloodlines to help save certain breeds or breed work ability etc back in again. I think it's an important thing to have a registry body to hold your pedigrees & health results etc but I dont believe it must be only 1 registry above all others.As for trusting certain reg bodies above others well I know of several proven to be wrong pedigrees in our leading dog registry. I find it interesting what some people allow themselves to be talked into beliefing something is the blind truth when we all know nothing in life is that black n white. for me I judge a breeder on thier willingness to take back ANY animal breed by them, the day to day lifestyles thier animals life, the health care & genetic testing done, thier openess to share faults & issues within thier bloodlines not by how many ribbons won or who they choise to sign off on thier dogs pedigree.