Unregistered Pups From Registered Parents

[Airedaler]

If you have the name of the dog anyone who is a member of a State Canine Association can access the ANKC database. If the dog is registered then it can be found there.

Happy to look for you if you want to PM me the details

[Birgitbee]

Thanks just sent you a PM Airedale.

Edited December 28, 2014 by Birgitbee

[Birgitbee]

1419804209[/url]' post='6618884']

If you have the name of the dog anyone who is a member of a State Canine Association can access the ANKC database. If the dog is registered then it can be found there.

Happy to look for you if you want to PM me the details

Hi Airedales, I just sent you a pm.

[Little Gifts]

We want the general public to choose their dogs (particularly something like a dane) from a good registered breeder so if that breeder was not playing by the rules then they are giving their peers and potentially the breed a bad name. DOB them in - you can't play by the rules only when it suits you.

[Staffyluv]

Just a note that the original post was not deceiving anyone (like in the current conversation).

They stated their dogs NSW number, both parents were pedigree registered but they told everyone that the litter was not a registered litter.

They didn't try to deceive anyone.

Sorry if you were deceived Birgitbee - not all registered breeders are created equal. So it pays to research, research and then research some more.

Edited December 29, 2014 by Staffyluv

[RuralPug]

Just a note that the original post was not deceiving anyone (like in the current conversation).

They stated their dogs NSW number, both parents were pedigree registered but they told everyone that the litter was not a registered litter.

They didn't try to deceive anyone.

Sorry if you were deceived Birgitbee - not all registered breeders are created equal. So it pays to research, research and then research some more.

Yes it is buyer beware, but it is up to all ANKC affiliated group members to uphold the rules they agreed to upon joining so that buyers can feel a bit safer. If we don't push for our "brand" not to be pirated, then the affiliates will not make the effort to keep the brand name clean.

Getting back to the original unregistered litter advertisement, were those people actually registered breeders (with a prefix) or were they just people who owned two pedigree dogs that had a litter? Were they even Dogs NSW members at all or did they just quote the registration number of one of the dogs?

If those breeders were actually members of Dogs NSW (whether breeder or non-breeder members regardless) then yes, they ought to have been reported.

If not, then they probably should not have mentioned the parents pedigreed status in the advert, as that would be unfair trading on Dogs NSW good name, so to speak, even if they did not intend it that way.

[Jed]

I cannot understand why people would be members of an organisation, agree to the rules, and then flaunt them when they don't suit them. Makes me sick, and pulls every honest and reputable breeder down to that level.

Registering all pups makes things easier (in the end) for the breeder, and certainly for the buyer, who then knows what he has is the genuine article, and not something else.

[dancinbcs]

Just a note that the original post was not deceiving anyone (like in the current conversation).

They stated their dogs NSW number, both parents were pedigree registered but they told everyone that the litter was not a registered litter.

They didn't try to deceive anyone.

But they are still in clear violation of the rules and should be reported. Dogs NSW takes these breaches of the rules very seriously. The only way to weed out the bad breeders is if they are reported. Please send a copy of the ad to Dogs NSW and they will follow it up.

[Staffyluv]

Just a note that the original post was not deceiving anyone (like in the current conversation).

They stated their dogs NSW number, both parents were pedigree registered but they told everyone that the litter was not a registered litter.

They didn't try to deceive anyone.

Sorry if you were deceived Birgitbee - not all registered breeders are created equal. So it pays to research, research and then research some more.

Yes it is buyer beware, but it is up to all ANKC affiliated group members to uphold the rules they agreed to upon joining so that buyers can feel a bit safer. If we don't push for our "brand" not to be pirated, then the affiliates will not make the effort to keep the brand name clean.

Getting back to the original unregistered litter advertisement, were those people actually registered breeders (with a prefix) or were they just people who owned two pedigree dogs that had a litter? Were they even Dogs NSW members at all or did they just quote the registration number of one of the dogs?

If those breeders were actually members of Dogs NSW (whether breeder or non-breeder members regardless) then yes, they ought to have been reported.

If not, then they probably should not have mentioned the parents pedigreed status in the advert, as that would be unfair trading on Dogs NSW good name, so to speak, even if they did not intend it that way.

From what I could gather they just had two registered dogs - no prefix from what I could tell.

To me they are still BYBers but at least they were honest about it (I guess).

[Staffyluv]

Just a note that the original post was not deceiving anyone (like in the current conversation).

They stated their dogs NSW number, both parents were pedigree registered but they told everyone that the litter was not a registered litter.

They didn't try to deceive anyone.

But they are still in clear violation of the rules and should be reported. Dogs NSW takes these breaches of the rules very seriously. The only way to weed out the bad breeders is if they are reported. Please send a copy of the ad to Dogs NSW and they will follow it up.

The ad is long gone now.

I wonder how many people do this?

These were the first I ever saw that mentioned their Dogs NSW member number - but still admitted that the pups were not registered (I had never seen that before, the reason for my initial post asking if it was an issue or not).

[oakway]

Any chance it may have been a fake number ?.

[Starkehre]

Or perhaps if they weren't members themselves, they quoted the member number on the pedigree... belonging to the breeder or previous owner?

Either way, if they are members (breeder members or not) they are in breach and if they are not members they are being dishonest saying they are.

Non members breed pedigree dogs all the time. It's not illegal, just very disappointing for the breeder, the breed and pedigree fanciers.

Non breeder members that do it should be struck off, it is against their COE.

[Steve]

Actually this is a really serious issue - if we are forced to put our member numbers in ads we cant have people clearly breaching the rules or being shonky with the member numbers and making us all look bad. If ever you see it again it is something that seriously needs to be bought to the CC attention - not good at all.

[OSoSwift]

Actually this is a really serious issue - if we are forced to put our member numbers in ads we cant have people clearly breaching the rules or being shonky with the member numbers and making us all look bad. If ever you see it again it is something that seriously needs to be bought to the CC attention - not good at all.

Agree totally

[Staffyluv]

I agree that it is a serious issue.

I noticed an ad on the FB page with a dogs NSW number, they stated both parent dogs were pedigree registered but the pups were not and would not be registered.

I don't even know why they would use a dogs NSW number because as discussed, it could have easily seen them deregistered.

At the time I didn't copy the ad on the page, so have no idea what the number is, if it was their number or the previous breeders number or they are just members and not registered breeders.

I personally believe they are no better than any other BYB.