"pet Only" - Not Registered Litters

[cowanbree]

A piece of paper with a fancy name?! Really?!

Is that what you think pedigree papers are? Something that gives a dog a fancy name?

No wonder the canine breeding world is where it is.

In this case it is. What else is different? His parents have still had all the relevant health tests, he is still eye and vet checked and he still comes with a lifetime of breeder support. A lot of NZ breeders only register the ones that are going to be shown or bred so I guess it is more the norm here.

So how does anyone keep track of the positives and negatives in the lines? Pedigree papers arent just a piece of paper they are intrinsic to being able to track issues for generations and making the person who buys them take pride in what they have over and above anyone else who is breeding them.

I can't speak for everyone but if I sell one without papers it is being sold as a pet and will be desexed so there will be no future generations for that particular puppy. As to if that puppy has issues, I keep in contact with all of my puppies and am as interested if this puppy has issue as I am in one registered on the limit register. Registering them doesn't make you a better breeder.

So how is this information that may turn up over the years passed onto other breeders if the pup isn't registered?

How is it passed on if the puppy is registered? Perhaps Australia is different but in NZ the only thing held by the NZKC is the name. Health testing and any arising issues are not recorded with them.

[Amax-1]

Pet puppies were sold without papers prior to the introduction of the limit registry. Maybe the breeder is an older breeder and doesn't agree with the limit registry. They are the only ones that know why they are doing it. But apart from the fact they are breaking a ANKC rule I don't think it automatically makes them a bad breeder.

I think they would have to be pretty old - in the eastern states its been at least 20 years. They sign a COE and agree to abide by that - register all puppies.

Umm I am 47yo and when I was a breeder there was no limit registry.

I remember a pup I purchased in 1982 from an imported sire litter.....this was a top dollar litter back then and the pups were $250 papered or $200 without papers. There was no limited reg, it was either papered or not and the buyer had the choice as reflected by price. I know of a couple of (old school)breeders who still do this and after the pups are sold, they main reg only the pups people want papers for so they may paper 3 out of the 6 pups born and they don't issue limited reg papers at all. Perhaps not in compliance with the code, but they do it at the request of the buyer. I think it's more that the buyers will ask if non papered provides a discounted price as papers are not of importance to those particular buyers. I guess when talking papered pups costing between $1500/$2000, it's a lot of money and if they can get the pup a bit cheaper, some will go with a non papered option.

Is that a bad thing??.......I would certainly recommend a non papered option from a quality litter over a BYB litter if someone asked me what they should buy

[RallyValley]

This is something I wrote for our breed club's website and explains it pretty well:

Why does it matter if my pup is registered with a Canine Association?

If someone is breeding unregistered dogs it means they are unable or unwilling to register the dogs.

They may be ‘unable’ to because they have dogs that a breeder has given to them on limited registration, so as a pet, and not to be bred from. If they breed from this limited register dog the Canine Association won’t let them register the pups. When you have a deep understanding of canine structure you learn how to recognise small conformation faults. If these faults are combined with another dog with a similar fault could become a major issue.

A registered breeder will pay around $25 to register the pup with the Canine Association, which is a drop in the bucket as far as the cost of raising a pup properly goes. If a person has a dog with the proper main registration paperwork but is too lazy to register the pups with a Canine Association you must wonder what else are they cutting corners on, socialization? The sire and dam’s health testing? Microchips? Vaccinations? Proper nutrition?

Other reasons that a registered breeder can’t register pups are:

-the breeder is a member of the Canine Association but has been banned for breeding the same bitch 3 times in 18 months (so breeding back to back three times without a break)

-they have disciplinary sanctions

So if it’s a registered breeder but for some reason they are not registering the litter be very suspicious. The same goes if the breeder tells you it costs more for papers.

[Steve]

What makes us different to anyone else who breeds a litter of puppies is our care and concern for future dogs and future litters not just the one on the ground

The papers are what enables us to keep the records associated with each dog and use it and pass it on.

[~Anne~]

You know, it's not even the fact that it means that a record of the ancestors of one particular purebred dog is unknown, but the fact that a breeder talks so negatively and is so blasé about a system that is meant to be the backbone of purebred dogs.

It stupefies me that breeders, in this current day, can so easily devalue the worth of an ancestory of a purebred dog. That ancestory and the method of recording it, is what is used as one of the psitive arguments for buying a purebred dog. It is one of a set of many values that ONLY purebred dogs have.

Edited August 10, 2014 by ~Anne~

[Steve]

its also about your brand can you imagine where

Prada would be if they sold their product without the label?

Surely they would only consider that if the product was inferior or had a fault - that registered pedigree and your prefix on it is huge and you treat as if it means nothing!

[teekay]

You know, it's not even the fact that it means that a record of the ancestors of one particular purebred dog is unknown, but the fact that a breeder talks so negatively and is so blasé about a system that is meant to be the backbone of purebred dogs.

It stupefies me that breeders, in this current day, can so easily devalue the worth of an ancestory of a purebred dog. That ancestory and the method of recording it, is what is used as one of the psitive arguments for buying a purebred dog. It is one of a set of many values that ONLY purebred dogs have.

Not entirely sure where I stand on breeders not registering some or all of a litter, But I do disagree with the bolded bit above. The ancestry of the dog doesn't change if they are not registered. (As long as you are 100% sure the breeder is legit and is doing all the correct health tests and is registered themselves) It is still as valuable to the purchaser, they want a pedigree dog with the lineage intact, they just don't need the piece of paper that proves it. I have the pedigree certificate for the 2 pedigree dogs I have owned. They sit in a safe, never looked at, never needed. In my situation why do I need them? - other than to prove the pedigree is legit, but as i said, if you are sure of that then why?

Mind you, if, as stated, it only costs $25 to register a pup then it does seem pointless to break ANKC rules for $25

its also about your brand can you imagine where

Prada would be if they sold their product without the label?

Surely they would only consider that if the product was inferior or had a fault - that registered pedigree and your prefix on it is huge and you treat as if it means nothing!

But when I buy a pup from a breeder the 'label' is unimportant to me. Yes there ae certain breeders I would like to have a pup from but that is becasue I love their lines, not because of their name. If I was to get a dog, in furture from one of my favoured breeders, I wouldn't need to annouce or prove to the world I had a *Insert breeder name here* pup. I would be happy just knowing myself where the pup had come from.

Bear in mind these are only the musings of someone who only really inhabits the pet world with short forays into dog sports (not competitively) :)

[Steve]

The label would be important to you if something went wrong. This week I received a phone call to tell me one of the dogs I bred had passed away. She was 17 and a half years old and had needed no vet treatments and had been in great health up until the last 6 months of her life. I did that - not someone who just takes two dogs which are convenient and lets them have sex and they talk about my prefix with nothing but glowing terms - thats my brand and I put it on every single thing I breed and cant imagine why anyone would devalue what goes into making a predictable healthy long lived dog as if its just another dog that could have come from any where.

[VizslaMomma]

Pet puppies were sold without papers prior to the introduction of the limit registry. Maybe the breeder is an older breeder and doesn't agree with the limit registry. They are the only ones that know why they are doing it. But apart from the fact they are breaking a ANKC rule I don't think it automatically makes them a bad breeder.

I think they would have to be pretty old - in the eastern states its been at least 20 years. They sign a COE and agree to abide by that - register all puppies.

20 years ago I think there was only one registered Neo breeder in this country.

[Pjrt]

Branding is a funny thing. I bought some product from a 'boutique' source hoping to discover something special. Turns out it was all a well known brand with different labels.

[Steve]

Pet puppies were sold without papers prior to the introduction of the limit registry. Maybe the breeder is an older breeder and doesn't agree with the limit registry. They are the only ones that know why they are doing it. But apart from the fact they are breaking a ANKC rule I don't think it automatically makes them a bad breeder.

I think they would have to be pretty old - in the eastern states its been at least 20 years. They sign a COE and agree to abide by that - register all puppies.

20 years ago I think there was only one registered Neo breeder in this country.

Well either way Im not up for excusing anyone because 20 or so years ago the system was different. If they are members now its up to them to know the code and what they have agreed to - if they don't like they shouldnt be there. You dont get to pick the eyes out of something you have agreed to and simply ignore the bits you dont like.

[VizslaMomma]

Well either way Im not up for excusing anyone because 20 or so years ago the system was different. If they are members now its up to them to know the code and what they have agreed to - if they don't like they shouldnt be there. You dont get to pick the eyes out of something you have agreed to and simply ignore the bits you dont like.

Oh, yes. I agree with you.

:)

[teekay]

The label would be important to you if something went wrong. This week I received a phone call to tell me one of the dogs I bred had passed away. She was 17 and a half years old and had needed no vet treatments and had been in great health up until the last 6 months of her life. I did that - not someone who just takes two dogs which are convenient and lets them have sex and they talk about my prefix with nothing but glowing terms - thats my brand and I put it on every single thing I breed and cant imagine why anyone would devalue what goes into making a predictable healthy long lived dog as if its just another dog that could have come from any where.

Not sure what you mean by the first bit but I do understand where you are coming from. As a breeder you are proud of what you do, rightly so, and want to put your name to your dogs. Awesome, nothing but admiration from me.

As I said, I don't necessarily agree with not registering them, just pointing out why they may not be important to some pet purchasers. Not me, incidentally, if I have purchased a pedigree dog I do want the papers etc, and I do look at Luka's ancestry when I see new litter of Aussies on the ground as I like to see if they have any common ancesters :)

[Steve]

Yes I hear you but we should be strutting our stuff so pet buyers understand what it is they are getting and why its such a big deal. Hard to do that when many who are breeding don't get it. Take a good look when something goes wrong and the first thing that gets slammed is the name of the breeder and their prefix - all of asudden when things go wrong everyone gets really interested in the prefix.

[JRG]

I have to agree with Steve.

I have been breeding for 38 years and am proud when someone tells me

" I met a W******* dog in town the other day - just had to be one of yours" Yes it is MY brand and I am pleased to be recognised.

At least I have not wasted my time!

[~Anne~]

You know, it's not even the fact that it means that a record of the ancestors of one particular purebred dog is unknown, but the fact that a breeder talks so negatively and is so blasé about a system that is meant to be the backbone of purebred dogs.

It stupefies me that breeders, in this current day, can so easily devalue the worth of an ancestory of a purebred dog. That ancestory and the method of recording it, is what is used as one of the psitive arguments for buying a purebred dog. It is one of a set of many values that ONLY purebred dogs have.

Not entirely sure where I stand on breeders not registering some or all of a litter, But I do disagree with the bolded bit above. The ancestry of the dog doesn't change if they are not registered. (As long as you are 100% sure the breeder is legit and is doing all the correct health tests and is registered themselves) It is still as valuable to the purchaser, they want a pedigree dog with the lineage intact, they just don't need the piece of paper that proves it. I have the pedigree certificate for the 2 pedigree dogs I have owned. They sit in a safe, never looked at, never needed. In my situation why do I need them? - other than to prove the pedigree is legit, but as i said, if you are sure of that then why?

Mind you, if, as stated, it only costs $25 to register a pup then it does seem pointless to break ANKC rules for $25

Of course it's ancestory doesn't change but the record of ancestory is lost.

Scenarios:

Person A buys unregistered pup. 5 years later person A dies and unregistered pup goes to unknown new person.

History lost.

Person A buys unregistered pup. 2 years later person A decides they can keep unregistered pup and rehomes it.

History lost.

Without a record accompany the pup of its ancestry, it effectively does not have a recorded ancestoral history. All of the arguments put forward so far assume that person A will forever have the pup and will keep on contact with the breeder.

It's a disregard for rules set down by a governing body, peer expectations, and it destroys a claim of value that purebred dogs have. When it is spoken of with such disregard 'it's just a piece of paper with a fancy name' it destroys the value that many have fought so hard to retain.

[Steve]

You know, it's not even the fact that it means that a record of the ancestors of one particular purebred dog is unknown, but the fact that a breeder talks so negatively and is so blasé about a system that is meant to be the backbone of purebred dogs.

It stupefies me that breeders, in this current day, can so easily devalue the worth of an ancestory of a purebred dog. That ancestory and the method of recording it, is what is used as one of the psitive arguments for buying a purebred dog. It is one of a set of many values that ONLY purebred dogs have.

Not entirely sure where I stand on breeders not registering some or all of a litter, But I do disagree with the bolded bit above. The ancestry of the dog doesn't change if they are not registered. (As long as you are 100% sure the breeder is legit and is doing all the correct health tests and is registered themselves) It is still as valuable to the purchaser, they want a pedigree dog with the lineage intact, they just don't need the piece of paper that proves it. I have the pedigree certificate for the 2 pedigree dogs I have owned. They sit in a safe, never looked at, never needed. In my situation why do I need them? - other than to prove the pedigree is legit, but as i said, if you are sure of that then why?

Mind you, if, as stated, it only costs $25 to register a pup then it does seem pointless to break ANKC rules for $25

Of course it's ancestory doesn't change but the record of ancestory is lost.

Scenarios:

Person A buys unregistered pup. 5 years later person A dies and unregistered pup goes to unknown new person.

History lost.

Person A buys unregistered pup. 2 years later person A decides they can keep unregistered pup and rehomes it.

History lost.

Without a record accompany the pup of its ancestry, it effectively does not have a recorded ancestoral history. All of the arguments put forward so far assume that person A will forever have the pup and will keep on contact with the breeder.

It's a disregard for rules set down by a governing body, peer expectations, and it destroys a claim of value that purebred dogs have. When it is spoken of with such disregard 'it's just a piece of paper with a fancy name' it destroys the value that many have fought so hard to retain.

Yep and if that's all it is what on earth are we doing knocking ourselves out supposedly to better the breeds?

[Dame Aussie]

If they want to be a member of the ANKC and have that name behind them then they need to follow the rules. If they don't want to follow the rules then why should they get any of the benefits of being a member? It goes both ways.

Being a BYB is not illegal so if they don't want to follow the rules and do it properly, why even bother becoming a member?

Edited August 11, 2014 by Dame Aussie

[perrin]

Georgia is our first pedigree dog and I love the fact that she is a pedigree not just just a purebred.

I'm a pet owner but I researched all of the dogs listed on her family tree just like I do for my horses and am doing for my own family.

To me it's not just a piece of paper. It's Georgias family tree and her history and therefor to me it is special.

I have it in my filing cabinet and even though Georgia is a desexed pet I am still proud to hold that piece of paper.

And still proud to own Georgia.

[kelpiecuddles]

Apart from that if you don't register the pup by the cut off age and later on you were to look at that pup and see it had turned out to be a fabulous looking dog that you would have liked to use in your lines you can't because the option to upgrade to mains is no longer there like it would be if the pup had simply been on limited. Or if the new owner decides 3 years down the track that they would like to try their hand at showing it's not an option available to them.