UKC Forums - UKC is going to be the new CKC ??

Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »
Show all 52 posts from this thread on one page

UKC Forums (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/index.php)
- (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/forumdisplay.php?forumid=)
-- UKC is going to be the new CKC ?? (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/showthread.php?threadid=347079)

Posted by LoupGarouTFTs on 04-24-2010 06:42 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by AnkhuIGs
Limited does not limit you from participating in registry activities with your dog..it prevents you from registering in the AKC any get you have from breeding it.

I'm sorry, but that's incorrect. The AKC website states:

quote:
Chapter 3, Section 4A of the AKC's Rules Applying to Registration and Discipline states the following: "Limited Registration may be requested for a dog when application for individual registration of the dog is submitted, provided the application, together with a request for such limitation, is filed by the owner(s) of the litter at birth.

No offspring of a dog for which Limited Registration has been granted is eligible for registration. Each registration certificate for such dog shall carry notice of the limitation, and the limitation shall continue, regardless of any change of ownership, unless and until the owner(s) of the litter at birth shall apply to AKC for removal of the limitation."

A dog registered with an AKC Limited Registration shall be ineligible to be entered in a breed competition in a licensed or member dog show. It is eligible, however, to be entered in any other licensed or member event. These events include: Obedience, Tracking, Field Trials, Hunting Tests, Herding, Lure Coursing, Agility and Earthdog.

I agree with the sentiment that the UKC needs to remain true to the UKC. Let the AKC and the CKC worry about their own registry-related policies and leave the UKC alone.

__________________
Kimberly Egan
LoupGarou (mostly) Toy Fox Terriers

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

AKC and UKC Ch. UAG1 'PR' LoupGarou Kajun-Fox Beausoleil CD, RA, NA, NAJ, CGC
AKC Ch. And UKC GRC La Isla's Wickfair Watersprite, #7 Toy Fox Terrier 2011
U-Ch. 'PR' LoupGarou Cajunization
U-Ch. 'PR' LoupGarou Christmas Bayou
U-Ch. 'PR' LoupGarou Bay Toys Kyrie Eleison
U-Ch. 'PR' Stardust Saints Geaux Marching
Showboat Saintsational Season, HT, BN, CGC

RIP Roger Dodger Over and Out. Your time on this Earth was far too short. God bless and God speed.

Posted by gemdach on 04-25-2010 01:20 PM:

RallyDachshund.......................I have a contract. Sold a dog with contract. Buyer paid remainder of price with check. I would not issue papers until check cleared and it was stated in my contract. Buyer was a scam buyer and bounced a $300 check. I refused them papers. AKC came down on me because papers did not accompany puppy to buyer...............................they came out and said that they do not get involved in contracts. The only reason I came out of it without a suspension or fine is because the breeder of my first Longhair (purchased in 1985) was then working at AKC (and still is) and he went to bat for me. All I got from it was a warning.................so now it is limited registration
for any pup that leaves me that isn't going to be shown.

Posted by skelaki on 04-26-2010 12:01 PM:

One thing I haven't seen mentioned is that the breeder can lift the limited registration for a dog if, in the breeder's opinion, that dog should turn out to be showable and a good candidate for breeding.

And, of course, the majority of responsible pet owners could care less that their pet has limited or full registration because they have no plans to breed or show anyway.

Limited registration is probably a good idea, at least in theory but I doubt that it deters the irresponsible byb who will just register with one of the bogus registries.

__________________
"A dog is not "almost human," and I know of no greater insult to the canine race than to describe it as such."

- John Holmes

Posted by Bijoupoodles on 04-26-2010 08:29 PM:

good points !!

Wow great points...everyone so level headed in responding too, which is nice to see. WE don't all have to agree, to be civil.

My pups are spayed or neutered or vasectomy or Tubal before they leave my home (which choice is up to buyer) NOW. Reasons I do this NOW are because I do not want my pups being bred when I have sold them to great "pet" homes, to someone who has no idea what they are doing when it would come to breeding or where the resulting pups will end up, basically not "breeder material" and then the responsiblity would come back onto me with pups from my lines...ANyway the reason I would not want someone to breed ..I mean you name the reasons (which really are too numerous to list here....

but heck.. my choice, how I sell my pups and I don't force anyone to buy from me and honestly... I know 100% I have lost sales because of this. oh well.

IF I sell to someone for breeding, it will be to someone who feel will do right by my dogs who I will support and mentor and make sure they get the best start at success that I can offer them. AND of course they have the best quality puppy I can offer them (at that age... best I can do). Basically to someone upfront that has shared that they wish to breed and what their goals are. I want to know where my pups and their progeny end up. Just "my" choice and way of doing things.

Here is something that I'm sure everyone has experienced...
This is to address the comment that "if we don't want our pups to be bred we sell them on "non-breeding" agreements or hold papers."

I have sold pups in the past that I held papers on and also had contracts to spay or neuter on. As we all have probably experienced... contracts are for honest people and recouping or enforcing a contract is pretty impossible in reality (sssshhhh this is just between us breeders...) because getting someone to court is expensive and recovering any court costs... well I can tell you stories. So "for me" this has not worked because people have bred anyway hoping not to get caught (so damage was already done) and basically the onus was on me to prove that they did this or prove they didn't spay by the timeline I had laid out on the contract and then try to recover any compensation or impliement any penelty in court (small claims).
Again... a long and difficult and expensive road, only to have pups already out there.

I have had people send me fake spay certificates.
I have had people send me spay certificates for a "toy" poodle instead of the standard I sold them.
So they can obtain spay certificates if they want them.
Just my experience...

ANYWAY.....
All this aside.
If I sell a puppy that is UKC registered "today" that I have spayed or neutered and that is incapable of reproducing ...
you would think "OK good done, nothing to worry about"...

WRONG !!!!

I know of people that have taken that UKC registration paper and use it on an "unregistered" dog that is "intact" to register a litter from that dog...

Now of course I know you are thinking..."well if it is your puppy and that puppy is spayed then you would write UKC and explain it" ... well I can if I know about it... what are the chances that I will hear about it ??

So just something else to think about... UKC papers can be used on ANY dog to register a litter out of that dog, IF we have no way to "LIMIT" the registration ... UNLESS you remain "co-breeder" on that puppy. Which as I have explained why this would not work for me...

One person mentioned that "LImited Registration" could be lifted...yes they can in AKC or CKC...something else for UKC to consider and not dismiss if UKC is considering having a "limited" tick box.

Money grab or not ... I would prefer to have "limited" registration so at time of sale my "altered" pups can go home with their registration papers and if they decide to do obedience or get any other titles they can do that in "Altered" classes as 1 option.
OR ... I would have the option to "lift" this later.

But ... after 20 some odd years those type of people are really few and far between in my experience.

My .02

brownpoodles@yahoo.com

__________________
"Luck is when preparation meets opportunity"

Posted by LoupGarouTFTs on 04-26-2010 09:15 PM:

Great points, BijouPoodles! I just wanted to add, though, that if you send the UKC a copy of the certificate they will probably be able to add it to your registered dog's file. Maybe that has not been true in the past, but with the advent of the new Altered champion classes, they are more likely to take the certificates as proof of altering. I'm just guessing, of course, but since you are the registered owner of the pup until the papers have been transferred, I would assume that they'd accept your submission of the spay/neuter certificate.

I agree with you on one particular point, though: better that you lose a sale than sell to an inappropriate home. It's so refreshing to see my faith in breeders here being reinforced: money is less important than the welfare of our animals!

Posted by Maverick061106 on 04-27-2010 03:30 PM:

UKC primarily focuses on existing as a performance registry, correct?

This sets them apart from AKC, CKC, etc.

If UKCs focus is primarily on hunting and sporting breeds, it would not be feasible to have this Limited Registration option. I sell my puppies to homes who will HUNT them and SHOW them. They are members of the family, but they have a job to do and are not meant to be "pets." I do not advertise them as pets and folks who inquire about "pet" hounds are directed elsewhere. Therefore, the Limited Registration would serve no purpose for me. It takes a couple of years to find out whether a hound is going to cut it as a tree dog. If, for one reason or another, a pup or dog is found unworkable, it should be culled (or altered), but this will not be known until long after the pup has been registered.

Sure, they make great pets, but I breed my hounds for a specific purpose, and if I am not putting them in the hands of people who will bring out thier full potential as a tracking and treeing dog, I am not being a responsible breeder or a good advocate for my breed.

On the one occaision I had a puppy with a bad bite, I did allow him to go to a pet home, to keep him out of the circuit. He was neutered and now lives happily indoors with his senior owners on a farm in Illinois.

Feists, curs, hounds, setters, retrievers, etc. The WORKING dog is what UKC exists for. If you want to breed and sell "pets" and do not like UKCs policies, stay with AKC.

I have hounds that are registered with AKC's Foundation Stock Service. I dread the day that AKC pushes the English Coonhound into the full recognition stage. There are seven UKC recognized Coonhound breeds, and of the four AKC allows full registration to, there are SO MANY MORE hounds bred just for looks, with no regard to hunting ability. Many AKC Black and Tans, Plotts, Blueticks and Redbones are big-footed, long-eared, clumsy dogs who don't know a coon from a hampster.

Because of the seeming "trend" that AKC tends to lean more toward the conformation crowd and not the total dog, I am ecstatic that UKC exists and functions the way it does.

Fortunately, AKC is making a real effort to pull in the hunting dog folks. Who knows whether it will help or hurt the dual purpose hound... we can only hope it helps!

__________________
'PR'Maverick's Smoke 'n Moonshine (two 1st place wins towards NITECH)

Posted by KYASHI on 04-27-2010 08:32 PM:

Didnt know UKC was just for the coonhounds and such. If so you will find a lot of people very upset that we have ALL registered our none hunting dogs with them and have poured thousands of dollars into showing, obedience, weightpull events. When I came over from AKC I understood that UKC was for EVERYONE. Not just the hunters. Maybe someone should have told us that UKC is for hunting only.

The limited registration is optional (by choice). Not mandatory. So you would be able to continue to register your dogs in the manner in which you do now. Sell to whom you like in the manner in which you do now. There are those who prefer to limit what a new owner can do with their puppy. Not every dog is meant to be bred. Not meant to show. Or meant to work. They are born a pet. Will remain a pet. Breeders just prefer to keep a bit more control over their animals. And the majority do not "cull" their puppies or adults because they cannot do the job which they were bred for. That practice went out long ago.

As for hounds in the AKC. There are many who show their dogs as well as hunt them. Not every AKC show dog is just a show dog. Many of the breeds who are working dogs do what they were bred for. Many a spaniel or setter or pointer spends many a weekend out in the field hunting. Then pops into the show ring when an event comes near. Dual purpose.

Posted by Maverick061106 on 04-27-2010 09:24 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by KYASHI
Didnt know UKC was just for the coonhounds and such. If so you will find a lot of people very upset that we have ALL registered our none hunting dogs with them and have poured thousands of dollars into showing, obedience, weightpull events. When I came over from AKC I understood that UKC was for EVERYONE. Not just the hunters. Maybe someone should have told us that UKC is for hunting only.

The limited registration is optional (by choice). Not mandatory. So you would be able to continue to register your dogs in the manner in which you do now. Sell to whom you like in the manner in which you do now. There are those who prefer to limit what a new owner can do with their puppy. Not every dog is meant to be bred. Not meant to show. Or meant to work. They are born a pet. Will remain a pet. Breeders just prefer to keep a bit more control over their animals. And the majority do not "cull" their puppies or adults because they cannot do the job which they were bred for. That practice went out long ago.

As for hounds in the AKC. There are many who show their dogs as well as hunt them. Not every AKC show dog is just a show dog. Many of the breeds who are working dogs do what they were bred for. Many a spaniel or setter or pointer spends many a weekend out in the field hunting. Then pops into the show ring when an event comes near. Dual purpose.

I said they are primarily a PERFORMANCE registry... never said anything about just being for hunting dogs. Performance includes all the activities you listed - agility, field trials, nite hunts, obedience, weight pull.

In my opinion, a dog should not be bred if it does not conform to the standard. If all these pets are being bred and do not conform to thie standard, thus in your eyes are not "breeding or showing" material, WHY are they being bred in the first place?

You are so right - MORE culling should be done. Folks have loosened up our standards and kept them all around - our breed is now polluted with dogs who do not conform to the standard and do not posess the hunting instincts necessary to get the job done. Culling can be euthanizing OR altering... we're not barbarians, and we do love our dogs just as much as the next person, believe it or not. We just tend to be a little more strict in our expectations.

I also did not say that every show hound in AKC is strictly a show dog. I said MANY are being bred solely for that purpose with no regard to hunting ability.

__________________
'PR'Maverick's Smoke 'n Moonshine (two 1st place wins towards NITECH)

Posted by KYASHI on 04-27-2010 10:01 PM:

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Maverick061106
[B]

"Feists, curs, hounds, setters, retrievers, etc. The WORKING dog is what UKC exists for. If you want to breed and sell "pets" and do not like UKCs policies, stay with AKC"

"Because of the seeming "trend" that AKC tends to lean more toward the conformation crowd and not the total dog, I am ecstatic that UKC exists and functions the way it does."

If you read what you wrote you will see you said that UKC's main focus is with the hunting dogs.

I DO NOT stand for culling what so ever!!!!! Those who practice it use it to rid themselves of perfectly good pet dogs. It is a practice as I said that died long ago. Sounds like there are those who still lower themselves enough to use it to hide the pets they breed. If it isnt alive no one will Know they bred it.

EVERY litter of dogs, (any breed) is not going to produce all show dogs, all hunters, all breedable stock. There are pets born in most litters. No matter how you breed you will NEVER produce non pet litters. If you do you are GOD. Anyone who breeds to achieve only perfect specimens in their whole breeding program needs to wake up, smell the coffee and realize that the real world isnt going to give it to you. You WILL breed pets. You WILL breed dogs that should never be bred. You WILL breed dogs who will not hunt no matter how much you force them. Reality is that breeding is a gamble. We do all we can to produce dogs closest to the standard set forth for them. For them to be healthy and live long lives. There will never be a breeder who produces only perfect dogs.

I also did not say anything about people breeding pets to produce pets. I am one of those breeders who does a limited registration so that the dog cannot be bred. I also spay/neuter before the dog even leaves my home. I know if a dog is going to turn out show quality or not long before it leaves me. I am not eager to get rid of my puppies. I breed rarely. Am not in it for the money. So can take the time to properly evaluate. they do change a lot as they grow. But again that is my breed. I know how to evaluate mine. I support the breeders who know how to evaluate theirs. Out of a litter of 4 puppies, I have 3 show quality. 1 pet. The lines are exceptional. The parents are exceptional. The puppies are exceptional. But guess what? A pet was born. She is alive and healthy and will make a perfect companion to someone. Never to be bred. But still registered. Both AKC and UKC.

Posted by LoupGarouTFTs on 04-27-2010 10:23 PM:

Oh, good grief, give it a rest.

Posted by Laurie Soutar on 04-27-2010 10:27 PM:

The misunderstanding here seems to be in terminology.
'Culling' does not mean 'killing'
Culling mean to remove from the breeding/gene pool - if you spay and neuter the dogs you sell as pets, you are culling them.
Some people put dogs down, some spay and neuter - they are both culling.
Laurie

Posted by AnkhuIGs on 04-28-2010 12:13 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by Maverick061106
I said they are primarily a PERFORMANCE registry... never said anything about just being for hunting dogs. Performance includes all the activities you listed - agility, field trials, nite hunts, obedience, weight pull.

In my opinion, a dog should not be bred if it does not conform to the standard. If all these pets are being bred and do not conform to thie standard, thus in your eyes are not "breeding or showing" material, WHY are they being bred in the first place?

You are so right - MORE culling should be done. Folks have loosened up our standards and kept them all around - our breed is now polluted with dogs who do not conform to the standard and do not posess the hunting instincts necessary to get the job done. Culling can be euthanizing OR altering... we're not barbarians, and we do love our dogs just as much as the next person, believe it or not. We just tend to be a little more strict in our expectations.

I also did not say that every show hound in AKC is strictly a show dog. I said MANY are being bred solely for that purpose with no regard to hunting ability.

Sorry but euthanizing dogs....to cull them, is barbaric, and immoral. IF breeders cannot find homes for dogs, regardless of ability or lack of ability, thenthey should not be breeding. IF euthanasia culling is the only way they have to "place" excess puppies.

I have absolutely NO problem with the UKC being primarily a performance event based club..NONE what so ever, but that does not EVER mean that any event, be it, hunting, agility OR..the evil to end all evil..."conformation"...is better than any other event. Period.

__________________
Serena Galloway
www.ankhu.com

Home of Multi-BIS U-GrCh, Multi Group Winning/Placing AKC Bronze GCh, MBIS/MRBIS Int'l Ch, CKC Ch. Pineridge-Anji's St. Cecilia

Home of BIS/MRBIS U-GrCh., MBPIG CKC Ch., Int'l Ch, AKC GCh. Ankhu's Steamy Windows

No part of this message may be forwarded without permission

Posted by LoupGarouTFTs on 04-28-2010 01:23 AM:

Nice way to hijack the thread, people. Culling is unpleasant to some people and invaluable to others. It has been a part of animal husbandry for probably tens of thousands of years, starting when people realized that hunting the weaker animals would result in stronger (and probably bigger) herds. Lets not bring morality into this discussion; there are people who would say that simply owning or breeding animals, regardless of culling or whatever, is immoral. You want to jump on someone, go jump on them.

We all have different approaches to what is important in breeding. There are different reasons for doing different things and different dogs for different purposes, all of which have different requirements.

NO ONE CARES ABOUT YOUR PETTY DIFFERENCES OF OPINION. These point might be valid points for discussion, for a different thread, but in no way are they on topic for this formerly peaceful thread.

Can we go back to having a reasonable discussion with level-headedness and civility? Sans drama? Please?

Posted by Sarah on 04-28-2010 04:26 AM:

I agree, the culling discussion is unnecessary. As far as the limited registry goes... it's not something I am personally interested in using, I would prefer to just be careful about my pups' placements. I don't like the fact that the UKC will give full registration to a dog that's been given an AKC limited registration, though, as that goes against the breeder's wishes.

I also feel that if there are people that want it, it would be nice for the UKC to offer the same option. Just because I don't want it myself, doesn't mean nobody else should have it either. It doesn't seem as though it would be particularly complicated or expensive to implement, and could even be used as a minor income source, if there were a charge to lift the limitation. (I know some breeders prefer to place pups on a limited registration, and lift the limitation if the pup turns out well.)

I think it's great that the UKC chooses to do things their own way, it's good to have alternatives. But that doesn't mean they can't occasionally adopt an idea that their customer base already likes and wants to use. Particularly something like this, which is entirely voluntary.

__________________
UACH UWPCH UCDX CH MACH DayDream London Calling CDX RAE OF AD PD2 CL3-R CL3-H CL3-S CGC TC TT
UWP UAGII AKC/UKC CH Flyin DayDream Londons Burning CD MX MXJ OF AAD CGC TT
Flyin The Jolly Roger

Posted by Maverick061106 on 04-28-2010 01:54 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by KYASHI
I DO NOT stand for culling what so ever!!!!! Those who practice it use it to rid themselves of perfectly good pet dogs. It is a practice as I said that died long ago.

Culling is still practiced, very much so - more in the hunting and sporting breeds, I'm sure. In our breeds, there are always dogs who will not turn out. Whether it is due to human error or genetics, it can't usually be known for sure. That dog exists to serve a purpose, and if it is not living up to what it's supposed to do, it has no place in the hunting world. As I stated, culling does not necessarily mean killing - altering is also culling - it is simply removing those genes from the gene pool. I can tell you that I have not euthanized any pups of mine up to this point in time. However, if I choose to euthanize a dog for the breed's sake, I have the choice to do so or not.

quote:
Originally posted by AnkhuIGs
Sorry but euthanizing dogs....to cull them, is barbaric, and immoral. IF breeders cannot find homes for dogs, regardless of ability or lack of ability, thenthey should not be breeding. IF euthanasia culling is the only way they have to "place" excess puppies.

Finding a home for a puppy does not have anything to do with culling. Culling is to responsibly remove that dog from the gene pool. It has nothing to do with whether you can find them a home or not.

You both say culling is immoral - but what about all those hounds in the animal shelter right down the street that are going to be euthanized? Any given day, they are full up. If someone wants a "pet," they should go get one at the shelter... There are too many potential "pets" being killed every day for someone to be breeding them on purpose. Just my opinion... I will leave it alone now.

__________________
'PR'Maverick's Smoke 'n Moonshine (two 1st place wins towards NITECH)

Posted by Unclerock on 04-28-2010 05:51 PM:

Finally
Someone come out and said it!
Quit breeding couch/yard rats that don't conform to standard. Cull hard with both eyes on the standard not the bank account.
Rock

Posted by Heather Minnich on 04-28-2010 08:17 PM:

The AKC is not for profit, they are Not-For-Profit.

Also it is not the AKC who would ever push for any of the FSS breeds to get full breed recocgition with the AKC, that will only come from the parent breed club!

Many folks blame the AKC for things that they had nothing do with in their breeds. Most if not all changes to breeds come from the parent breed clubs.

If you want to see dogs with proper conformation and the ability to do the job they were bred for in the show ring, push the AKC, UKC and CKC to require a field or other applicable title before the conformation title is totally valid.

Heather

quote:
Originally posted by Maverick061106
UKC primarily focuses on existing as a performance registry, correct?

This sets them apart from AKC, CKC, etc.

If UKCs focus is primarily on hunting and sporting breeds, it would not be feasible to have this Limited Registration option.

Feists, curs, hounds, setters, retrievers, etc. The WORKING dog is what UKC exists for. If you want to breed and sell "pets" and do not like UKCs policies, stay with AKC.

I have hounds that are registered with AKC's Foundation Stock Service. I dread the day that AKC pushes the English Coonhound into the full recognition stage. There are seven UKC recognized Coonhound breeds, and of the four AKC allows full registration to, there are SO MANY MORE hounds bred just for looks, with no regard to hunting ability. Many AKC Black and Tans, Plotts, Blueticks and Redbones are big-footed, long-eared, clumsy dogs who don't know a coon from a hampster.

Because of the seeming "trend" that AKC tends to lean more toward the conformation crowd and not the total dog, I am ecstatic that UKC exists and functions the way it does.

Fortunately, AKC is making a real effort to pull in the hunting dog folks. Who knows whether it will help or hurt the dual purpose hound... we can only hope it helps!

__________________
Check out my cool lunge whips/flirt poles with coyote, raccoon or fox tails plus other neat stuff!
http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2014305&id=1255320957&l=b16d0e5bd1

Posted by Maverick061106 on 04-28-2010 08:32 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Heather Minnich
Also it is not the AKC who would ever push for any of the FSS breeds to get full breed recocgition with the AKC, that will only come from the parent breed club!

Many folks blame the AKC for things that they had nothing do with in their breeds. Most if not all changes to breeds come from the parent breed clubs.

Are the parent clubs not the same for most AKC recognized breeds in UKC? I really don't know, just asking... From what I understand, once AKC registers so many of a certain breed in the FSS, then they will attempt to fully recognize the breed and allow it to participate in all events, including conformation.

The strictly Coonhound events function basically the same way in both registries. Currently, the remaining hound breeds who are not fully recognized by AKC and are in the FSS, are no different than the UKC hounds... UKC hounds are not separated into "show bred" or "hunt bred" as AKC breeders have done with the Black and Tan Coonhound and others. In UKC, they are bred and intended to be dual purpose.

I do not intend to blame AKC for what is happening to the breeds. It is not AKC...nor the parent clubs...it is the breeders. The breeders who pay no mind to hunting ability in a hound, yet breed them anyway because they are "pretty." There are companion breeds that you can do that with...

__________________
'PR'Maverick's Smoke 'n Moonshine (two 1st place wins towards NITECH)

Posted by flywire on 04-28-2010 09:28 PM:

No, parent clubs are expressly not the same for AKC and UKC.

__________________
Michele Fitzgerald
FlyWire
http://www.flywiredogs.com

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:07 AM.

Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »
Show all 52 posts from this thread on one page