Allerzeit Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 Talking to a friend over the weekend about a situation, where someone has purchased a bitch on the main register and kept that puppy entire. The bitch has now been bred to an ANKC registered dog, on main register and belonging to an ANKC registered breeder. The owner of the bitch is not a registered breeder, and the litter is not an ANKC registered litter. Is the owner of the stud dog in breach of the COE? My immediate thought was that they are, but reading the COE I'm not so sure... A member shall not permit any of that member’s pure bred dogs to be mated to a dog of a different breed, to a cross bred dog, to an unregistered dog of the same breed, or to a dog not on the Main Register without the prior approval of the member’s Member Body. As far as I can see, there hasn't actually been a breach here? The dog has been mated to a bitch on the main register, even though the owners aren't registered and the resulting litter is also not registered. What do others think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragonwoman Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 Talking to a friend over the weekend about a situation, where someone has purchased a bitch on the main register and kept that puppy entire. The bitch has now been bred to an ANKC registered dog, on main register and belonging to an ANKC registered breeder. The owner of the bitch is not a registered breeder, and the litter is not an ANKC registered litter. Is the owner of the stud dog in breach of the COE? My immediate thought was that they are, but reading the COE I'm not so sure... A member shall not permit any of that member’s pure bred dogs to be mated to a dog of a different breed, to a cross bred dog, to an unregistered dog of the same breed, or to a dog not on the Main Register without the prior approval of the member’s Member Body. As far as I can see, there hasn't actually been a breach here? The dog has been mated to a bitch on the main register, even though the owners aren't registered and the resulting litter is also not registered. What do others think? Is the bitch still in the name of her breeder? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allerzeit Posted May 18, 2014 Author Share Posted May 18, 2014 No, she's not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 No breach there. Doesn't say the bitch has to be owned by anyone or any member in particular just that she must be registered - that's done when its born. See it all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wundahoo Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 Yep, I can attest to this ! Under the current C of E all that a stud dog owner is obliged to do is to ensure that the bitch presented for mating is on Main Register. Even if the person who presents the bitch is not the registered owner and even if the registered owner has said that the mating CANNOT take place, in the terms of the C of E, the owner of the stud dog is not guilty of any breach !! This has happened to a bitch which I bred and which lived with another person. She was still in my name, which is not a breach of our regs and is common practice here. When I heard about what had been planned I contacted the owner of the stud dog and said that the mating should not take place. Unfortunately it did, in spite of my protests. Even worse was that at her next season the bitch was again presented to the same stud dog owner and was mated yet again. I had sent the owner of the stud dog a written statement saying that the mating was not to take place but it happened anyway. The owner of the stud dog told me that she had not done anything wrong because she had checked to make sure that the bitch was on main register before she did the mating. The person that presented the bitch for mating paid the stud fee and this is all that the owner of the dog was interested in...... ka-ching $$$$$. Well known breeder too ! Obviously there is a huge divide between compliance with the C of E and compliance with certain moral standards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 Yep its heaps more common that you would think and many breeders some opf whom advertise on this site do it all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jed Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 Might not technically be in the COE, but it is against the spirit of the COE. Also fringes on "breeding to improve the breed" If you don't like the rules, don't join or remain a member, it's voluntary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 Well one would think if it were really against the spirit of the COE that by now they would have changed it so it more closely resembled their spirit - they have after all had a hundred or so years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wundahoo Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 Might not technically be in the COE, but it is against the spirit of the COE. Also fringes on "breeding to improve the breed" If you don't like the rules, don't join or remain a member, it's voluntary. I think that the rules need to be changed. If enough people voice an opinion then it is possible for this to happen. Some years ago, I had an issue with another rule within the C of E and put pressure on sufficient people for the matter to be taken to ANKC and there was a change made. Of course it didnt make a difference to the problem that I had at the time but at least it (hopefully) prevented it from happening again and allowed the controlling bodies to make a case against anyone who breached that rule in the future. One lone voice of protest often doent make them listen but if enough members put a reasoned case forward it can change things. Not always an easy task but one that is possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
espinay2 Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 (edited) An interesting loophole and yes, one that seems to need to be closed. But it does present some interesting regulatory questions in how it should be closed. It is a question I guess in how far the owner of a stud dog should be accountable for the actions of others. They can check that the bitch is on main register. They can check that the owner of the bitch as per its registration papers is a registered breeder. They should probably be required to check that the owner of the bitch actually wants the bitch to be mated (signature required on a form?) Beyond that, what should they be responsible for? Should they be responsible if the owners membership lapses? Or the owner of the bitch does not register the litter once born? The owner of the bitch or the bitch is suspended or de-registered? If their stud dog was used in good faith and through the actions (or non action) of the bitch owner the stated or understood intentions/actions are not followed through, whould the stud owner be held in breach of regulations or the COE? Careful wording would be needed. Edited May 19, 2014 by espinay2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
temperamentfirst Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 It could be solved as follows: The owner of the bitch should be obliged to show: 1. Their ANKC member body membership card and 2. The bitch's ANKC registration papers proving that the bitch is registered to them. The ANKC membership card also shows the members' prefix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dancinbcs Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 Why would they not register a litter? The puppies are worth more with papers. If the bitch owner is not a member and does not have a prefix, the bitch can just be leased to someone who does and the litter bred under their prefix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 Restricting stud dogs to those which are owned by members restricts the gene pool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogsfevr Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 Restricting stud dogs to those which are owned by members restricts the gene pool. No it doesn't it just people wanting to have litters without paying out money . Hear it all the time we only want one litter so the kids can see them or friends buy them or the neighbours have said yes or better still the ones we don't sell or keep flog to the pet shop . Anyone can become a member ,if they want to do right by our stud dogs we will do right by them but we don't encourage the one off fly by nights who just want a back door litter with a good stud dog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mystiqview Posted May 26, 2014 Share Posted May 26, 2014 (edited) If the litter is advertised... the puppies are resulting from the mating of two pedigree animals. No different to the old days before WE HAD to register all the puppies. I don't agree with the practice - however I can see why some will cash in on the loophole. Most pet owners do not really care for papers and how many would REALLY check or chase up the papers? Another thing - Should the stud dog owner also have to check with Canine to make sure the owner/breeder of the bitch is a current member and/or not on a suspension? Or the bitch possibly on a third litter within 18 months etc? Does not sound like it in this case - but if a bitch owner presented a bitch for mating and presented main registration papers for a dog of that breed - who are we to REALLY know if the bitch presented IS that bitch (short of having a microchip scanner) or the person is also holds a current valid Canine membership? Sometimes you can only go by what information is presented to you, and sometimes that information can be a well convincing lie and you may not know the difference. Edited May 26, 2014 by Mystiqview Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mjosa Posted May 26, 2014 Share Posted May 26, 2014 The previous post is why I never allow my boys to go to people that I have very little knowledge of and what their alternative motives might be. I always ask for a photo of the bitch if interstate and a copy of the pedigree, my boys are put over bitches that belong to very close friends whom I have known and trusted for years. They are not for public stud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts