Erny Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 So why is it? What is their reason for not accepting these dogs ("labradoodle")? Australian Cobbadog - just so as to not introduce confusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 (edited) Okay, found the other website... but I'm confused- We are not convinced that it is in a breed or dog's best interest for it to be registered with traditional purebred registries and feel they have failed at ensuring the welfare of the dogs as a priority. It is for this reason we have chosen to use the MDBA foundation registry rather than strive for breed recognition with the ANKC/AKC. At this time we feel the focus is more in line with what is best for the dogs as well as the breed. We feel this is the way of the future. It ensures Cobbadogs can utilise a wider gene pool and use this registry regardless of which country they live in. They arn't going for ANKC recognition? That quote from their website is complete rubbish, the real reason they aren't going for ANKC recognition is because they have no hope of getting it. Yep, neither does the Mini Foxie. Absurd isn't it. Now that they have changed their name there is no reason why they wouldnt get ANKC recognition when ever, if ever they have complied with the criteria required to apply. In order to fit that criteria thy needed to change their name just as The Australasian Bosdog has recently changed its name from Aussie Bulldog so that when ever if ever they want to be recognised as a breed they fit what is required to be able to do so . In both the Australasian Bosdog and the Australian Cobbadog they are at least 5 to ten years away from being able to do that if they want to do that at the time . Many groups working on one day being recognised as a breed are adamant they dont want to be given the tick from the ANKC and the Aussie Bulldog has split into 3 different groups one of which is of the belief that ANKC recognition would be detrimental to the breed and which is refusing to change the name. If they cruise along for 15 years and make these kind of decisions at the end when they are able to qualify rather than now then all they work for is lost if some dont agree to go for ANKC recognition.The Murray River Curly coat retriever peopel are definite they never want to compete in dog shows and feel getting a tick for their breed would not be best for what they goals for the breed are .Some working dog registries which also have ANKC recognition will not accept dogs which are registered with the ANKC. The Cobbadog people started out with a name which confuses the public because there is a vast difference between what most consider to be a labradoodle and what they are doing - which is why they have changed the name in the hope that as time progresses that the public and the dog world will come to know they are not breeding first cross poodle x labs . Usually when a breed is in a developmental stage lots of mistakes are made with pedigree recording and with those who are within the group not agreeing on what is the best to do for attaining the long term viability and goals of the breed especially when there is still an open stud book. Working on a breed in development is difficult and not just because the requirements for actually being a breed is long and lengthy .Its 15 plus years of being treated as if you are the scum of the earth by those who believe we have enough breeds and who cant see the difference between what someone has to do to get to breed recognition over what someone does to breed first cross dogs.Just as there is in any breed there is in fighting and those who don't agree on what is required to get to the end result - often with those who are keeping the stud registry simply deciding they wont give the details out and it all blowing up with many false starts and lots of nastiness. In many country's main stud registries including the states which is the biggest in the world they allow those who can prove they are working on a breed in development to use their foundation registry to record their pedigrees - this ensures that the integrity of the record keeping is under an arm's length registry control and eliminates many of the accusations which have been levelled at most breeds in development in Australia regarding incorrect pedigrees etc .In many other species it is also nothing out of the ordinary for those working on a new breed to be allowed the use of these tools as they work toward one day fitting the necessary criteria to be a recognised breed. The ANKC has nothing to do with any breed as it is working toward fitting their criteria until they get to where they can fit that criteria at least 15 years after those developing the breed have decided that where they want to go have been working without any outside body overseeing what is happening as they move toward their goal. I understand that traditionally most purebred dog people have had the beleif that if the ANKC dont recognise it then its not a breed. Dog breeds have had to be recognised as a breed by the ANKC to be eligible for acceptance at ANKC sanctioned dog shows but some don't ever want to compete in ANKC affiliated dogs shows.Some only want to hold their own dog shows - the mini foxie people do this and so do the Cobbadogs,white shepherds etc but some such as the Murray River Curly coat retrievers dont ever want to have dog shows especially not those affiliated with the ANKC.In the states the Maremma Sheepdog isnt a recognised breed and isnt even on their foundation registry - that doesnt mean the breed as a breed doest exist - its simply means it cant compete in their sanctioned events because they dont want to. just as any one who looks at a Murray river curly coat retriever or a mini foxie knows instantly what they are to suggest that ANKC recognition has to be the goal for all breeds in order for the world to recognise them as a breed doesnt really make much sense in this day and age and there have always been many other registries other than the ANKC registry .Recognition as a breed with the ANKC grants you entry to ANKC stud books and ANKC sanctioned events - if a breed has decided they dont want the ANKC to keep their pedigrees and they never want to compete in the conformation ring held by the ANKC why would they want to be recognised by them? The ANKC doesn't recognise pit bulls but seems to me that doesn't stop them from being treated as a breed when we talk restricted breeds . There is a vast difference between a first cross mongrel and what those who are working and breeding consecutive generations toward a consistent and predictable look and behaviour do and if it were just about the money they would make a lot more by simply breeding first cross labradoodles than spending their money and their lives working on a new breed. When dogs of a new breed are "visibly similar in most characteristics" and have reliable documented descent from a "known and designated foundation stock" they can then be considered members of a breed, and, if an individual dog is documented and registered, it can be called purebred. Whether they want the ANKC to recognise it or whether the ANKC does regonise it neither impacts on the fact that they will one day fit the definition Because a purebred dog means, "the sire and dam of a dog are members of a recognized breed and that the ancestry of a dog consists of the same breed over many generations" Disclaimer - No Im not supporting mongrel breeding I am supporting the right for people to have a go at developing a new breed if they have the time and courage to do so as long as they have articulated breeding goals and methods. and the concept of giving them the use of tools to help them do a better job which also brings them under a code of conduct - a foundation registry which is why - even though Im not fussed on the name- changing the name from labradoodles to Australian Cobbadog no longer gives credibility to those breeding first cross dogs which they call labradoodle and can help the Cobbadog people hopefully one day become a breed. Edited March 17, 2012 by Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Okay, found the other website... but I'm confused- We are not convinced that it is in a breed or dog's best interest for it to be registered with traditional purebred registries and feel they have failed at ensuring the welfare of the dogs as a priority. It is for this reason we have chosen to use the MDBA foundation registry rather than strive for breed recognition with the ANKC/AKC. At this time we feel the focus is more in line with what is best for the dogs as well as the breed. We feel this is the way of the future. It ensures Cobbadogs can utilise a wider gene pool and use this registry regardless of which country they live in. They arn't going for ANKC recognition? That quote from their website is complete rubbish, the real reason they aren't going for ANKC recognition is because they have no hope of getting it. Yep, neither does the Mini Foxie. Absurd isn't it. So why is it? What is their reason for not accepting these dogs ("labradoodle")? Because as yet they either dont fit the necessary criteria for ANKC recognition or they don't want to be recognised by the ANKC as they don't want to participate in the ANKC conformation shows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kajtek Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 :D Respect Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WExtremeG Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 Thankyou for your detailed answer- you've certainly put a different light on it :) A couple of questions though... Why are there two organisations for the same "breed" (ALA+ALAC), and what is the "breed" for if they're NOT designer dogs like they say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WExtremeG Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 Why are there two organisations for the same "breed" (ALA+ALAC) Sorry, should have elaborated... ALA calls them labradoodles, while the other uses the names labradoodle & cobbadog interchangeably until the latter becomes known. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 (edited) Thankyou for your detailed answer- you've certainly put a different light on it :) A couple of questions though... Why are there two organisations for the same "breed" (ALA+ALAC), and what is the "breed" for if they're NOT designer dogs like they say? there are actually three organisations and just as I explained earlier this is caused by in fighting and some not agreeing with the vision for the breed. the original founders had a certain vision - a laid back non shedding dog well suited as an assistance dog and as time has progressed some didn't agree with the way others were going about that - this is common with breeds in development - and all breed really even those which are established but because there is an arms length registry for established breeds no one has more say or more power and they have little choice but to work together .Some want more testing , some want less, some want more and different infusions etc You need a single parent club to be able to progress to breed recognition. edited to ad until yo get to about where the Mini foxies are with an established breed standard and requirements for registration even with an open stud book you see loads of conflict - the fact the mini foxies have been able to maintain only one breed club and progess without too much bloodshed is a testament to their president who has often been battle weary as well over the years. Edited March 18, 2012 by Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remarkabull Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 Excellent posts Steve. I find all of this very fascinating as we have just become the proud owners of an Australasian Bosdog (Aussie Bulldog). She is registered with the ABS and it has been interesting reading up on all of this type of thing. As you said there is more than one registry for Aussie Bulldogs and the ABS is the one that is aiming for recognition by the ANKC. It is still a few years away yet but I have no doubt that it will happen sooner or later. Another registry is still using British Bulldogs in their breeding programs and I have also noticed that some of the 'breeders' charge a substantial amount more than others and some also seem to be breeding for colour (I noticed a number of 'blue' puppies on the website that were much higher in price than the others). They also have not changed their name to Australasian Bosdog or any other name as they are not interested in being recognised by the ANKC at this point in time. The ABS has recently changed their standard to say that blue, black or black pied were not accepted colours. I don't agree with randomly crossing any 2 dogs just for the sake of it, but I have no problem with people who have a vision in mind and are prepared to do it the right way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rusty&biscuit Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 ahahaha love this!! :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogbesotted Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 Donning flamesuit... Just a thought, but wouldn't it be better if the 'Cobbadog' did become ANKC registered? I mean, the sooner that happens, the sooner that these dogs can be bred ethically, correct? If the ANKC were to register them though, they sure as hell better come up with a better name than 'Cobbadog' That was my thought too, Mr.Mister. Better to come under the auspice and Code of Ethics of an organisation rather than being left out in the cold to do what they want to do with no guidance and no obligations or responsibilities? i second this sentiment. I would rather see them come under the umbrella of an organisation and be subject toa specified ocde of ethics, than nothing at all.. H Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~Anne~ Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 Interestingly, if they really only wanted to puppy farm or breed indiscriminately they wouldn't have joined a group and signed up under a code of ethics anyway. Do people really think it would help sales if this is what they thought they would achieve? Puppy farmers don't seem to have any problems flogging their puppies do why pay to join a group and play to the rules and ethics if this was the case? Seriously, it doesn't take a lot of logic to see that the breed development idea is a serious attempt to do the right thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WExtremeG Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Interestingly, if they really only wanted to puppy farm or breed indiscriminately they wouldn't have joined a group and signed up under a code of ethics anyway. Do people really think it would help sales if this is what they thought they would achieve? Puppy farmers don't seem to have any problems flogging their puppies do why pay to join a group and play to the rules and ethics if this was the case? Seriously, it doesn't take a lot of logic to see that the breed development idea is a serious attempt to do the right thing. Their code of ethics isn't as extensive as ours, though I do agree it is a good attempt at becoming more ethical... On a side note- what do you think of "Guardian families" for holding onto dogs that will be used for breeding(dog returns to breeder for the whelping of pups, and then goes back to its 'guardian family' until the next breeding)? One such example is in the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~Anne~ Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 I'm not sure I understand the concept sorry. Why would some need a guardian family exactly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WExtremeG Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 I'm not sure I understand the concept sorry. Why would some need a guardian family exactly? I have no idea- that is why I asked. I wanted to know if this sort of thing happened often and was considered normal in the world of breeding dogs. *shrug* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kavik Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 I think it is sort of like breeders terms? Instead of the breeder keeping all of their dogs on their properties, some of the dogs live with other families but are able to be used in the breeder's program. I think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WExtremeG Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 I don't know...example: One particular breeder has no breeding animals on site- they're all in "guardian homes" and are called in when the breeder wants to breed, or when the bitch is due to whelp (she goes back to her "guardian family" after the puppies are weaned at 8 weeks). I've never heard of this for dog breeding? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 I don't know...example: One particular breeder has no breeding animals on site- they're all in "guardian homes" and are called in when the breeder wants to breed, or when the bitch is due to whelp (she goes back to her "guardian family" after the puppies are weaned at 8 weeks). I've never heard of this for dog breeding? Some breeders have no choice - if they can only have 2 dogs in their back yard etc and they still want to breed. I wouldn't do it ,my breeding dogs are my family it but Im not restricted either.The logic is that the dogs get to live in a family environment and not a kennel type situation and the breeder can still have choices in what to breed and make good breeding choices - it also eliminates scrutiny from animal rights etc too I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WExtremeG Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 (edited) Nevermind. Edited March 21, 2012 by F11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megan_ Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 plenty of registered breeders hae co-ownership and lease bitches F11. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WExtremeG Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 It's not co-ownership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now