Extremely Important Issue

[SkySoaringMagpie]

This is not an issue of opening stud books with ANKC approval or importing dogs from COO with holes in the history but a blatant case of mishandling, deception and naive puppy buyers not getting what they have paid for. Almost every IW breeder I know has taken care with pedigrees and lines to avoid hereditary health issues and these dogs represent a risk in breeding where nothing is known of the dog in question. The real problem I see is that these dogs are now at the stage of the blanks not showing up in the next generation's pedigrees as this has been a problem of over 5 years duration.

Agree with kinsella. Furthermore, plenty of people have to pull dogs from programs all the time, for all sorts of reasons, including expensive high investment dogs. Why are the owners of these dogs so special that they shouldn't have to start again after a disappointment like the rest of us? We all know who the real criminal is here, and they got sucked in. They're not special in that respect.

My breed went through something similar in the UK about 5 years ago. It wasn't stopped at the registry, and while yes, those established in the breed know which ones are from where, and will make decisions accordingly, new people haven't a hope. That argument goes nowhere anyway, if you want to say "everyone knows and will police it themselves" then why bother having a registry in the first place? The registry is there so that we can make good decisions about lines we don't already have in our heads.

[Roseclipt]

Agree with kinsella. Furthermore, plenty of people have to pull dogs from programs all the time, for all sorts of reasons, including expensive high investment dogs. Why are the owners of these dogs so special that they shouldn't have to start again after a disappointment like the rest of us? We all know who the real criminal is here, and they got sucked in. They're not special in that respect.

My breed went through something similar in the UK about 5 years ago. It wasn't stopped at the registry, and while yes, those established in the breed know which ones are from where, and will make decisions accordingly, new people haven't a hope. That argument goes nowhere anyway, if you want to say "everyone knows and will police it themselves" then why bother having a registry in the first place? The registry is there so that we can make good decisions about lines we don't already have in our heads.

Absolutely agree - people do pull dogs from breeding programs because they fail health tests or just plain aren't good enough. I think they should be pulled from the main register - it is just that our registries seem to have a mind of their own instead of doing what is perceived to be "the right thing" by their membership. In this case of them NOT being removed, I am sure the Wolfhound breeders will know what to avoid.

Because of this attitude of "the powers that be" none of us can be sure of our purebreds. If it wasn't for the internet very few of us would have known ....

[Bug]

Up until sometime in the early 1960s it was possible to obtain a dog from the pound, have it inspected by 3 allbreed judges and if they considered it to be purebred based on phenotype then it was registered as 'pedigree unknown'. The British KC also allowed dogs of pedigree unknown into the stud book until about the same period. Inspection is used in development registers in Australia.

Sometime in the 1970s in Victoria there was a Rottweiler breeder who was found to have had at least one litter crossed with Doberman and many of the dogs from this were in the ring . I believe they were deregistered.

The ANKC and its member bodies is simply a keeper of stud books. The integrity of the stud book is paramount but it is simply a record of parentage as supplied by a breeder and sadly this IW issue shows it not proof of anything. Does this have implication for those breeds which may need to use ANKC registration to prove they are not a restricted breed or cross of one?

There are many breeds which are known have had other breeds introduced in to them over the years and no breed which can prove they have not had it happen.

DNA does not prove breed but it can prove parentage.

This is a terrible situation for IW breeders. They are the custodians of their breed and they should be allowed a say. When breeds were officially permitted to deliberately crossbred it was with the agreement of the breed clubs.

What is terrible is that the offending breeder was a member of the disciplinary committee and instrumental no doubt in handing out penalties to people who committed far less serious 'crimes' than proven cruelty, theft and falsification of pedigrees.

[Beauie]

When a breed is already established a blank in a dogs pedigree is unacceptable

Edited August 9, 2012 by Beauie

[Sheridan]

I don't recall if the people duped by this fellow sued him? Or indeed, sued Dogs Vic. It would be cheaper for Dogs Vic to deregister them.

[fifi]

And it does concern ALL BREEDS because this action will set a precedent for all other breeds, and a so called 'pedigree'

will not be worth the paper it is written on.

I think for those people who feel its a single breed issue or doesn't affect them or their own breed(ing), this is the crux of the issue that should be addressed.

fifi

[Saffioraire]

And it does concern ALL BREEDS because this action will set a precedent for all other breeds, and a so called 'pedigree'

will not be worth the paper it is written on.

I think for those people who feel its a single breed issue or doesn't affect them or their own breed(ing), this is the crux of the issue that should be addressed.

fifi

This. What bothers me is how people seem not to be bothered by the fact that at least one dog used here was a CROSS BRED! Ok falsify a pedigree with a limited dog... blank the pedigree, etc etc - this annoys me and I don't agree with it but for arguments sake the dog is still a purebred so it's not "contaminating". But this is a cross bred dog, meaning cross bred pups are being registered as pure bred.... so why bother with registration at all?? Why have an institution who is responsible for the keeping of pedigrees so that breeds remain pure if this institution is willing to sweep it under the carpet when a cross bred is introduced?!

And to say that the good breeders will do the right thing is completely beside the point, and the same mentality of turning a blind eye. Sure a number of good breeders will, but I am sure you can rifle through several topics on here that clearly indicate there are more than a handful of deceitful breeders who are registered with the ANKC and yet puppy farm, or breed for the $$ with little regard for the dogs and if it didn't affect the $$, the pedigrees either. The whole point of a regulated pedigree register is to keep breeders answerable, saying that it is suitable for them to become a law unto their own completely undermines the entire ANKC as an institution and identifies it as redundant.

[Saffioraire]

And to say "oh it is the Wolfhound breeders problem, and none of our business" is the same as a GSD, Rottweiler, Doberman etc breeder saying "oh BSL is a Staffy breeders problem, why do we need to care, it doesn't involve us" No it doesn't.... YET! Let these things happen once, twice.. oh and suddenly it is your problem, and you wonder why every other breeder on the planet can't see why your infuriated. It compromises the entire ANKC as an institution, if your dog is registered with the ANKC then it compromises what you stand for as well.

[BJean]

This. What bothers me is how people seem not to be bothered by the fact that at least one dog used here was a CROSS BRED! Ok falsify a pedigree with a limited dog... blank the pedigree, etc etc - this annoys me and I don't agree with it but for arguments sake the dog is still a purebred so it's not "contaminating". But this is a cross bred dog, meaning cross bred pups are being registered as pure bred.... so why bother with registration at all?? Why have an institution who is responsible for the keeping of pedigrees so that breeds remain pure if this institution is willing to sweep it under the carpet when a cross bred is

Cross bred?

What contamination?

The dog was an unregistered IW.

Edited July 4, 2012 by lilli

[Greytmate]

I don't think it's an all-breed problem or even an IW problem. It is a problem for those who hold the dogs who are of suspect breeding.

Not all pedigrees have the same value, some dogs have much better breeding than others. If you don't like these dog's pedigrees, don't use those lines. A pedigree allows somebody to determine a a value, there is no inherent value in a pedigree. It's just a record, and these dogs wouldn't be the only ones that have a pedigree that has some substandard dogs in it.

It is not as simple as the idea that pedigree dogs are better than non- pedigree dogs, what matters are the quality of dogs on that pedigree.

[SkySoaringMagpie]

I don't think it's an all-breed problem or even an IW problem. It is a problem for those who hold the dogs who are of suspect breeding.

Not all pedigrees have the same value, some dogs have much better breeding than others. If you don't like these dog's pedigrees, don't use those lines. A pedigree allows somebody to determine a a value, there is no inherent value in a pedigree. It's just a record, and these dogs wouldn't be the only ones that have a pedigree that has some substandard dogs in it.

What is the purpose of the record?

[Meea]

Remember this guy didnt just lie about his own dogs - he faked other people dogs by saying he breed to them when he did not.

Pure bred dog forum. If this is not important, why are we here and doing what we do??

[Greytmate]

I don't think it's an all-breed problem or even an IW problem. It is a problem for those who hold the dogs who are of suspect breeding.

Not all pedigrees have the same value, some dogs have much better breeding than others. If you don't like these dog's pedigrees, don't use those lines. A pedigree allows somebody to determine a a value, there is no inherent value in a pedigree. It's just a record, and these dogs wouldn't be the only ones that have a pedigree that has some substandard dogs in it.

What is the purpose of the record?

To provide information about the dogs lineage. It's then up to you to determine if that breeding is desirable or undesirable. An unknown ancestor might be undesirable, but many known dogs are undesirable too. Up to the breeder to choose a dog of the best breeding they can. Just because a dog has a pedigree doesn't automatically make that dog a candidate for breeding from. You have to read the pedigree and make a decision from there.

[Greytmate]

Remember this guy didnt just lie about his own dogs - he faked other people dogs by saying he breed to them when he did not.

Pure bred dog forum. If this is not important, why are we here and doing what we do??

I think the ANKC should be requiring that all breeding animals be DNA profiled.

What has happened with the IW is in the past now, and breeders should be calling for a better system so it doesn't happen again.

It is only around $100 to have a dog profiled, a very small expense compared to other costs of breeding.

[kinsella]

I beg to differ, this issue is not in the past as puppy buyers are still waiting for pedigrees for dogs born over a year ago. One such purchaser has been told by Dogs Vic that they cannot promise that the suspensions won't be reinstated. How would you feel if you had paid anywhere up to $3,000 for a supposed show dog that you had not been allowed to show? I suppose because this debacle started about 5 years ago, to some people it may seem to be history but to those unsuspecting buyers it is a very current problem.

[Saffioraire]

This. What bothers me is how people seem not to be bothered by the fact that at least one dog used here was a CROSS BRED! Ok falsify a pedigree with a limited dog... blank the pedigree, etc etc - this annoys me and I don't agree with it but for arguments sake the dog is still a purebred so it's not "contaminating". But this is a cross bred dog, meaning cross bred pups are being registered as pure bred.... so why bother with registration at all?? Why have an institution who is responsible for the keeping of pedigrees so that breeds remain pure if this institution is willing to sweep it under the carpet when a cross bred is

Cross bred?

What contamination?

The dog was an unregistered IW.

Front page of Dog News Aust' (paragraph 5) "These members said the correct sire for two of the litters was in fact an "unregistered dog of dubious parentage"" (paragraph 6) "The dog (in question who had sired the litters) was unregistered and his former owner wrote...stating that he did not believe his dog was a purebred Irish Wolfhound. Subsequent DNA testing was inconclusive"

THIS is the big problem. As I said using a limited register or unregistered dog of known bloodline that is a purebred dog is immoral and I don't agree with it but to use a dog of unknown heritage that it's very owner did not believe to be purebred is a whole other kettle of fish. And to shrug shoulders and say let bygone's be bygone's ... well I'm not too happy about having my membership with an institution who doesn't back what it stands for - which is the purebred dog.

Just in case people are misunderstanding, I have NO issue with crossbred dogs. I own one, who I love dearly. She is irreplaceable in our eyes, and no less of a dog than any of my ANKC papered dogs. She sleeps on a bed, cuddles on the couch and gets away with more than most. She is beautiful, intelligent and every bit a part of our family as the next. If someone was to run her down because she is not a registered pure they would cop an earful. BUT this is about purebred dogs - and I believe that WHY conduct pedigrees and sanction purebreds if when it all gets too hard "oh well whats a cross bred here and there".

I grew up with if your going to do something do it properly. It doesn't mean they are "better" or "worth more" or make better family pets or breeding dogs simply because they have a pedigree, but if you are going to keep PUREBRED records then for Pete's sake keep them exactly that.. pure!

[Greytmate]

I beg to differ, this issue is not in the past as puppy buyers are still waiting for pedigrees for dogs born over a year ago. One such purchaser has been told by Dogs Vic that they cannot promise that the suspensions won't be reinstated. How would you feel if you had paid anywhere up to $3,000 for a supposed show dog that you had not been allowed to show? I suppose because this debacle started about 5 years ago, to some people it may seem to be history but to those unsuspecting buyers it is a very current problem.

What happened was in the past. The breeding can't be undone. It happened five years ago.

If I had paid that much money for a pup, I would want a pedigree certificate, and if there are unknown dogs in the pedigree that's what should be written on the pedigree. These pups should be allowed to be shown.

Are people suggesting that these current puppy buyers are not entitled to a pedigree certificate at all?

I can't work out what it is that some of you want from the ANKC? You want the dogs in question to be de-registered? You want compensation?

I would be wanting a system in place to make sure it can't happen again, because the past can't be undone. DNA profiling stops this sort of thing happening.

[m-sass]

If the ANKC determined a dog that had been bred was unregistered, coudn't they deregister the progeny of that dog and every dog born to that ancestory??. Personally I think a pedigree ammendment with a blank space for the offending dog is a reasonable action in the circumstances??.

[Saffioraire]

I beg to differ, this issue is not in the past as puppy buyers are still waiting for pedigrees for dogs born over a year ago. One such purchaser has been told by Dogs Vic that they cannot promise that the suspensions won't be reinstated. How would you feel if you had paid anywhere up to $3,000 for a supposed show dog that you had not been allowed to show? I suppose because this debacle started about 5 years ago, to some people it may seem to be history but to those unsuspecting buyers it is a very current problem.

I can't work out what it is that some of you want from the ANKC? You want the dogs in question to be de-registered? You want compensation?

I would be wanting a system in place to make sure it can't happen again, because the past can't be undone. DNA profiling stops this sort of thing happening.

This is a really good point, and as far as I believe the system has been put in place to work towards this, with microchipping rules etc. Although I find it disappointing that the rules aren't more stringent ie. having a vet sign off on the scanned chips of the parents etc but I suppose you can't knock progress while it's going in the right direction.

From what I have heard they want the dogs down graded to limited so they cannot be included "lawfully" in a breeding program. They would still then be issued with a pedigree that way. Why should the VCA provide pedgirees simply because these people forked out the money? They should be filing a group law suit against the ******* who lied to them and bred false pedigree dogs.

[Greytmate]

From what I have heard they want the dogs down graded to limited so they cannot be included "lawfully" in a breeding program. They would still then be issued with a pedigree that way. Why should the VCA provide pedgirees simply because these people forked out the money? They should be filing a group law suit against the ******* who lied to them and bred false pedigree dogs.

Why shouldn't they supply a pedigree? These dogs have pedigrees, even if part of them is unknown. The owners are entitled to have the names of the known dogs on their papers. If the dogs are on the limited register, then they can't be used for breeding so their pedigrees are nobody else's concern.

Yes, the owners could sue the person who was found to have substituted the dogs, and maybe they should.