I think people should work within the system that is in place. If you flood the KC with well bred quality litters and lead by example the rest should follow.
I don't think the divisions do anyone in the dog world any good at all...least of all the dogs.

A quality dog proves itself in the show ring. I know many dogs that are shown that never get better than a third or fourth, so even though the dog is being shown a lot, it can't be good enough qaulity or it would have had at least one good placing.

The point is, many 'breeders' Show 1 stud dog, that does well all the time, and then breed that 1 stud dog to all the bitches sitting at home that are never shown, because the breeders know they aren't good enough to be shown.

Anyone can do the health testing and DNA, it doesn't mean they are breeding from a dog that meets breed standard and there would need to be a benchmark to state this.

This wasn't my idea by the way, as I stated, I wanted peoples' views on the idea.

Hence, the aforementioned introduction of DNA profiling.

Again, the DNA profiling which would have to be done on the Dam/Sire/Puppies and submitted before any registrations were allowed.

You cannot convince puppy farmers to follow your example, sorry A !

They are in it for the money, pure and simple, and regardless of how many well bred litters are being registered, there are always more registered by the PFs and because the KC won't instill any decent scheme to show any difference between the 2, the general public therefore have no idea, especially when the KC allow PFs to advertise litters on their website.

But the KC do do checks don't they...it may not be many but I know they do random checks on places....at least 6 a month I heard and they DO stop people being able to register their litters if they are not up to scratch.

Maybe if more people got involved with the KC and worked within it's parameters to change things, the present system could be changed and then everyone would be happy. Joining as an associate (or whatever the new one is called now!) would enable people to vote on certain things and put their points across. If you wanted your local Canine Society to change what it did you'd have to join to be able to vote - it works the same with the KC.

The reason I mentioned people losing interest in my previous post was that, as much as societies and exhibitors are crying out for decent venues for shows, etc, the idea and, in at least three cases, the practical start of a canine exhibition centre was off and running. People soon lost interest in it though and the ideas were scrapped.

Debs

Where on earth did you hear that from ?

The KC only cares about the money coming in for puppy registrations. They wont even listen to Breed Clubs when they request that certain criteria be put in place before registering a particular breed.

The KC have no authority to check on anyone !

Hence I put as my last paragraph "However I feel apathy will rule the day...."
Becky

That's right, but unfortunately if Breed Clubs with petitions, asking for certain criteria to be set out before registering litters, is ignored and turned away, what hope does the general public have.

The KC turn things away because they know it will desrease the amount of people registering litters and therefore reduce the amount of money coming in.

This is the point of the whole Issue of this idea in the first place. The KC don't and won't Listen !!

Yes but what if they registered one litter with the new system and the next (incorrect) litter with the KC and not with the new one? How would the people running the new scheme know? The dams would be different on paper and all relevant DNA tests would match with the litter in the new system. The second litter wouldn't have to be registered with the new system at all. You'd then have unethical people in the scheme which would defeat the whole object.

It sounds like I'm trying to put the whole idea down - that's honestly not my intention. I'm just trying to see the wider picture of what could happen if it took off and thinking about what could be done to avoid anyone pulling a fast one.

Debs

As this is my idea (sort of) I'll tell you how I 'saw' it starting. Firstly I wouldn't accept dogs that weren't originally KC registered with a KC reg number and official pedigree into the new system. That is initially, same applies with dogs from other countries must be registered with the relevant KC of their country. I would also set up a similar direct report scheme with the DNA testing companies and BVA schemes so we get the results direct!
However, as the new system would be for dogs that are health tested, DNA tested stock I do not think there would be many people trying to double the system as they would have to pay for dual registration (even if not using the same names for the same dogs) for every dog so they can get away with it which for most people would add up to far too much money so whilst I do understand that it is open to abuse (as is any system) I don't think it would be that corrupt.
Becky