Kennel Clubs General Chat

Ok so I wondering what people think of kennel clubs personally I think they are kinda of a joke just a because if you have registered documents on a dog you make large amounts of money on a littler of pups or seperate a breed that basically the same so what's you opinion on the subject?

Ever person has a birth certificate, and if they wish, can trace their ancestry back for many generations. Why should our dogs not be able to do the same?

When buying a puppy you hopefully want to buy a pup that is going to come from healthy parents, which a pup with a KC registration on its parents is going to give you the best chance of that.

The KC will hold parents and generations before health certificates, enabling you to look up and check the breeder you buy from has done all the health screening they should. You can't lie or misinform a buyer as it will all be down on record.

So no I don't think it's a joke it's the best and only way to make sure you are buying from reputable breeders.

I disagree, KC registered is something that is used to make buyers think they are being responsible, not always the case as long as they continue to cash in money and endorse the registrations from puppy farmers/byb on a regular basis, one is not guaranteed a healthy pup.

I agree to the " not always the case " it's not perfect and it does need to tighten up on their policy, BUT , it still is the only place with an official register of health testing for pure bred pups,

It's down to puppy buyers to make sure they do their research to ensure the breeder is ethical and does what they say, there is good and bad with the KC but if you are buying a puppy from a breeder who says they have done this or that, you can at least check up on the database to make sure what they say is true.

Some folk don't care about health screening or where they buy a pup from, that's fine you do what you wish to do, but for me KC registered breeder , is the first step for me to check them out and follow upon what they should and supposed to have done.

No Kennel Club would also mean no official Breed shows or Obedience shows, no KC Good Citizen Scheme, no YKC, and no Trials - Working, Field or Bloodhound. They also licence Agility, Rally, Heelwork to Music and Freestyle competitions. (Sorry if I've missed anyone's discipline). There would be no Champions either - nothing to aim for, just write out your own qualifying certificates? Also far fewer research grants for any health problems that might arise in certain breeds.
It could be argued that all these events could still continue on an informal basis, but who would determine the rules, and maintain the records? The KC might have many failings, but I'm afraid that we are now in so deep that we are stuck with it.

I’m not disputing that we need the KC, but the majority of ‘joe public’ doesn’t think as we do, they see an ad for KC registered puppies and think its health tested and from a reputable breeder ect: not realising that it does not require health tests or reputable breeders.

Take the assured breeders scheme, yes certain health tests are required, personally I don’t see the point as there are no restrictions on the results, i.e. as long as a dog was hip scored it could be bred from even if the score was high.
The only ‘requirement’ for the Gsd is ‘Hips’ which for me is not good enough.

Why can’t they simplify things and insist that only puppies from health tested parents whose scores are below the breed averages be allowed to be registered?
Then it would mean what Joe Public thinks it means

I agree that KC registered could mean much more if there was a minimum requirement to be met, particularly when the litter is advertised on the KC Puppy Finder site. This is one of the reasons that I am always harping on about breed clubs. Again, they are not perfect, and they can be political, but their insistence on signing a code of ethics is streets ahead of anything the KC demands. Of course, I can't speak for all breeds, but the Health Co-ordinators in the breeds that I have been associated with are really dedicated people with the welfare of the breed at heart.

Lots of breed clubs are upping their game, I know many Gsd breeders who have left the ABS, because they are health testing way and beyond the KC requirements.

I'm not following this at all. These reasons are not even logical as to why kennel clubs are a joke.

Personally as some one with registered dogs....I've never Made large amounts of money on a litter.
As for separating breeds people will have different opinions. I don't agree with all the seperations within some kennel clubs, as they are further splitting a gene pool for very trivial reasons. In other cases I think sub types should be separate breeds (or varieties) or those dogs which are now like a completely different breed.

Kernel clubs are not the end all beat all. It's up to breeders to breed ethnically and people obtaining puppies to pick wisely. The fact clubs exist aid in being able to do this. There are some people breeding for money and of course puppy mills.... but obviously there are benefits.

The ability to register litters / generations so that a pedigree id's available for every dog. Which gives you the ability to learn about the traits of ancestors. To find out if there are any health problems within lines. Some kennel clubs also keep track of health testing.

The kennel clubs and breed clubs also make it so that there is standardized trials for dogs to be graded and judged by in order to obtain ratings and titles. This includes conformation, working and sport trials and some offer temperament testing.

Kennel clubs can also provide other benefits like information on reputable breeders, fighting breed specific legislation and things like DNA services / parentage verification for the dogs registered with them.