UKC Forums - Registration numbers as public knowledge?

Show all 16 posts from this thread on one page

UKC Forums (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/index.php)
- (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/forumdisplay.php?forumid=)
-- Registration numbers as public knowledge? (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/showthread.php?threadid=391751)

Posted by CCR on 12-10-2010 07:58 PM:

Registration numbers as public knowledge?

Recently there was a great deal of uproar over a database created by a group European Catahoula enthusiasts. The database included a great deal of information, pedigrees and pictures on a huge number of dogs in the breed (most of which was stolen copyrighted information). It also included registration numbers, the majority of which were taken from the OFA website. I've always seen my dogs listed on the site as a good thing, and never really paid much mind to the fact that their numbers were hanging out in the open until this incident brought it into a rather harsh light. They're right there, for anyone to look at, to copy, to use....

I called the OFA to find out if we had any legal recourse if our dogs' numbers were taken from the site and used elsewhere, and I was told that by signing the OFA application I was releasing all information on it as public domain.

It is definitely NOT the OFA's fault that those dogs' numbers were copied from the site and used in a database for the exclusive use of the European club's members, and I still whole heartedly support the OFA and all the work they do for the dog world. I also realize that there are other avenues to gain registration numbers from, so the goal of the following petition is to try to gain enough support to at least approach the OFA and ask them to consider removing the registration numbers from the site. It bothered me to think that anyone can access those numbers from such a highly visible resource and decided to try to do something about it. Please read the petition statement and do what you believe.

http://www.petitiononline.com/rrn1110/petition.html

Thank you all for your consideration of the matter,
Carlye Reid

__________________
Cross Check Catahoulas
We show our working dogs, we do not work our show dogs
http://www.crosscheckcatahoulas.com
https://www.facebook.com/crosscheckcatahoulas

Posted by totalrott on 12-11-2010 01:29 AM:

Once your dogs are AKC registered,anyone can look up your dogs numbers,plus buy a pedigree of your dog...

Posted by AnkhuIGs on 12-11-2010 04:11 AM:

Uhmmm...most dogs info is public record. Why is it a problem? it can be looked up a variety of ways in a very public manner.

__________________
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 Amanda Tikkanen on 12-11-2010 01:23 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by AnkhuIGs
Uhmmm...most dogs info is public record. Why is it a problem? it can be looked up a variety of ways in a very public manner.

In the Catahoula community the group in the EU was (to the best of our knowledge) using it to falsify records and pedigrees.

__________________
Amanda Tikkanen
Sisu Catahoulas
UberPest's Journal
"Trek" Sisu's Trekker
"Halo" GRCH J Cross' Halo, RATO UKC Total Dog
"Ranger" BVIS CH of TD-CH, UWPV, CAX, UWPCH, GRCH J Cross' Currahee, WPSGRCH 2x UKC Total Dog
"Beau" BIMBS, RBIMBS GRCH Cat's Cradle's Beaufort, CGC, TDI, BPGM 2000-2012
"Lucy" Lucy Anna Skye, MB-CD, CGC--AMBOR; 1992-2007

Posted by A. Diogenes on 12-12-2010 02:08 PM:

Concidering that there are only 469 Catahoulas that are in the OFA data base AND the fact that they might be the dog breed that is the most individually recognizable, I think your petiton is just silly.

In a "rare" breed with such a small population and such a tight community, if you can't self police yourselfs....outside help isn't going to matter.

Reg. numbers in OFA are there to keep people honest and aide the buying public be they puppy buyers or fellow breeders.

BTW - Great looking dogs on you website. Nice to see quality working pictures.

Posted by AnkhuIGs on 12-12-2010 02:40 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Amanda Tikkanen
In the Catahoula community the group in the EU was (to the best of our knowledge) using it to falsify records and pedigrees.

happens all the time....in every breed.

The petition will do nothing to change the situation, other than to possibly make it worse.

You know what they say about publicity.....

Posted by LavendarBlue on 12-12-2010 03:44 PM:

Reg. Nos.

Just to stray a wee bit but still critical imo - I can see the day coming very soon when every dog that enters the ring will have the "wand" waved to check the microchip number against the entry. Appears that may stop the antics going on in the breed ring but, you still have to do your homework. Actually, one can make up any registration number they want on a pedigree - you can purchase the pedigree forms and fill them out yourself. In the meantime, it is best not to accept a pedigree as real unless it comes from the "real" organization.

Posted by CCR on 12-12-2010 07:15 PM:

The issue that concerns us is simple. Falsification DOES happen, but there is no need to make it easier for potentially fraudulent people to obtain the needed information. To be quite honest we expected a rousing chorus of "So what?" in answer to this question.

Thankfully neither our parent registry nor the UKC is "free" with their registration numbers like some other organizations. For those that did take the time to read this and add their names to our petition, thank you.

__________________
Cross Check Catahoulas
We show our working dogs, we do not work our show dogs
http://www.crosscheckcatahoulas.com
https://www.facebook.com/crosscheckcatahoulas

Posted by kinderwood on 12-12-2010 07:56 PM:

Just one question CCR...If OFA removes the registration numbers from their website, how do you expect to search their database?? By names?? I don't think that's a very efficient or effective way to search such a large database as I've noticed many names that are misspelled or don't exactly match up with other records. Maybe the owner misspelled them or they are typos, but the result is the same: you can't find them without searching by the registration numbers.

Now, JMO, but OFA is a public database and you do sign a waiver to allow them to make any and all information you put on their forms public. No, it's not right when some use the information to falsify records. However, crying foul over something that you not only gave the organization permission to publicize but also is a very useful tool for the majority is just not the answer.

This is not going to stop anyone from falsifying records. Just think about it...most breeders post their pedigrees right on their websites. AKC also sells pedigrees to anyone who wants to pay for them. I'm sure it's not hard to get the same from UKC. So, you see, the OFA database is just a drop of water in a colander. Those that want to falsify records will always find a way- even if they have to spend a small amount of cash to do it.

The only way I can think of to deter (notice I didn't say stop) anyone from falsifying records is to make it illegal- which I believe it already is in most countries. So, if you have a case and have the clear evidence to back it up, my suggestion would be to take it up with the courts- not to shut down the effectiveness of a useful tool the majority use properly.

__________________
Darcy Litzinger
Kinderwood Labradors
Home of:
BOB AKC CH ptd/BOB UKC CH/RBISP Intl/Nat JA CH Hayshaker's Kinderwood Charmed One CGC
AKC BOBP/UKC CH Hayshaker Kinderwood Where R U Xmas

Posted by AnkhuIGs on 12-12-2010 10:17 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by kinderwood
Now, JMO, but OFA is a public database and you do sign a waiver to allow them to make any and all information you put on their forms public. No, it's not right when some use the information to falsify records. However, crying foul over something that you not only gave the organization permission to publicize but also is a very useful tool for the majority is just not the answer. .

I agree. If you do not want your dogs information public, then do not make it public.

Posted by A. Diogenes on 12-12-2010 10:18 PM:

Re: Reg. Nos.

quote:
Originally posted by LavendarBlue
J- I can see the day coming very soon when every dog that enters the ring will have the "wand" waved to check the microchip number against the entry.

Well staid!!!

Something that should have been done years ago. In Shutzhund the ear tattoos are checked before the dog steps on the field. In conformation one could substitute a ringer and other than the competion that knows the individual dog no one would know.

I agree there are problems, but more availble info is the answer not less. I 'd like to see OFA offer something like Paw Village http://pawvillage.com/ So we'd have pics along with Cert. health records.

Posted by CCR on 12-13-2010 02:50 AM:

My apologies. I didn't mean to upset people, and I can only apologize for our mistakes. Now knowing that the OFA reposts registration numbers, we will never make the mistake of including them on an OFA application again.

Catahoulas are NOT registered with the AKC. The last time I checked this was a UKC board.... not an AKC one. If somebody wants to know about hip scores in our pedigrees, good and bad, they are welcome to ask us. They don't need to go to a third party website. I'll gladly continue to use their testing services, I have no complaints about the quality of work that they do. Clearly this issue doesn't matter to anybody else, and that is fine. We feel strongly about it, but we also can't force anybody to feel the same way.

As to posting pedigrees, we do that too. We do not post registration numbers, and never will. That is our choice.

Craig

__________________
Cross Check Catahoulas
We show our working dogs, we do not work our show dogs
http://www.crosscheckcatahoulas.com
https://www.facebook.com/crosscheckcatahoulas

Posted by A. Diogenes on 12-13-2010 03:28 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by CCR
They don't need to go to a third party website.

There is no need to apologize about how you feel about your breeding program. When you post up on any board your going to get responces that don't agree.

The very reason people want a 3rd party's opinon is there isn't(or shouldn't be) any biased. That's why we show dogs in conformation and in working trials.

For every person that is blatantly honest about thier dogs there are hundreds that are kennel blind if not outright talking smack.

While you might be the most honest man on this planet....how would I know that? But, if 12 judges all give your dog Best of Breed, and your dog get high points 6 cattle & hog bays, OFA rates your excellent and the same with their Sire & Damm and Grand Sire & Damm it all carries a lot more weight.

When I look at a website for puppy info, if I can readly find verifiable info I think the breeder is tring to hide something.

Posted by cintipwd on 12-13-2010 09:49 PM:

[QUOTE]Originally posted by CCR
[B]My apologies. I didn't mean to upset people, and I can only apologize for our mistakes. Now knowing that the OFA reposts registration numbers, we will never make the mistake of including them on an OFA application again.

You will have to supply some type of registration number to the OFA in order for them to do hip evaluations. You cannot submit an application without one. Again you are agreeing to this scoring as OFA is a partial open registy since failing scores are not posted with the consent of the owner.

You might want to consider using Penn Hip that is a closed data base and I believe still not available to the general public to search.

Tammy Groene
Cinti OH

__________________
Tammy Groene
Cincinnati,OH

Posted by WarrenMtrats on 12-13-2010 10:10 PM:

If you don't want reg # posted on OFA don't include them on the application or don't check the box to make the info public.

__________________
Warren Mountain Rat Terriers
http://imageevent.com/wmratz

Posted by Bijoupoodles on 12-15-2010 11:20 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Amanda Tikkanen
In the Catahoula community the group in the EU was (to the best of our knowledge) using it to falsify records and pedigrees.

I love having OFA results available 24/7 as if I am considering a certain litter I don't have to wait for a breeder to get the results to me. Still today not enough people are savy enough or quick enough to provide this information.. and taking their "word" for it is not an option. Having OFA provide the results as an unbiased 3rd party is ideal.

I understand the Catahoula concern about falsification of "papers" (I believe that was the concern ?) as with AKC no one can register the litter unless they have the certificate date along with the registration number of the parents.

Where as with UKC all a person needs to register a litter is the Registered name and UKC registration number of each parent.
Get that information and ANYONE can attempt to register a litter.

So perhaps instead of boycotting or petitioning the Catahoula people could have their registering body adapt some of the AKC requirements of having more data to register a litter... such as the issuing date of the registration papers... (of course never give out photo copies of your registration papers either...)

As for falsification of a pedigree... again pedigrees not obtained by your official registering body, should not be considered official and if you do come across a data base with wrong informaiton (which can also innocently happen) make the web host aware of it to have it corrected...

My .002

__________________
"Luck is when preparation meets opportunity"

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:28 PM.

Show all 16 posts from this thread on one page