If people buy a puppy on the strength that both parents are PRA clear and the puppy is found to be affected their fraud would soon come to light.

Yup, that's what I mean.

This is the major problem with the perception of the KC. The majority of people that want a dog believe that as long as the pup is KC registered then they can't go far wrong. KC registration is regarded by many novice dog owners as being proof of quailty, when it's far from that. When my sister decided to get a Bichon, if I hadn't been there to advise on health tests, what to look out for when viewing a litter etc, she would most likely have just bought from the first litter she came across.

At least if health testing was mandatory it would be one less thing to worry about for novice dog owners. Yes there will always be people who try and cheat the system and making sure that the dog was really health tested would need to be looked into, but surely it would be a major step forward? And surely it would put a lot of puppy farmers off, with the cost involved?

But by then the damage has been done, the pups could be 2 years old before the PRA comes to light and in the meantime the bitch could of had another litter or even 2. I think Optigen should use the system Antegene use, where even if the test is done by cheek swab, it has to be done by a vet and the micro-chip number checked first, like I said before ANYBODY can witness it, it could be your 90 year old neighbour or your 10 year old son.

Too many loop holes in it I think. They should stick to blood samples only, at least this way they can't beat the system.

in this day and age theres alot of puppy farmers out there that dont health test there breeding stock,let alone vaccinate there pups,or microchip them,alot of joe public will buy un-registerd pups as there cheaper than pups from health tested parents,if the demand wasnt there then that would be the only thing to put these people out of buisness and im sorry but the kennel club really dont come into any of there plans any way, how do you think the fake cigerettes get sold,poorer people not able to afford kc health tested dogs will buy the pups,its a proven fact,for if it wasnt the puppy farmers wouldnt be in buisness,i think the only way around the non faking of dogs would be to tatoo them say on the inside of the back leg,(they tatooed the greyhound on the ear yet nasty ppl cut off there ears before dumping them)then that way the tatoo mark would be visable to the vet or whoever was testing the dogs,i think the health testing should be compulsry,before registration along with tatooing,making it harder for these fools to copy,those dogs not tatooed dont get registerd,hence knowing which dog was puppy farmed,how many of us carry a microchipping detecter with us to buy pups.

But in relation to the identification issue anyone fraudulently using another dogs swab would be found out, not only banned from registering litters but undoubtedly open to legal action for fraud so rather an audacious move all round and not one that they can hope to get away with for long. Dogs may not show PRA until 2 years old but some of the offspring may themselves be tested before then so, unless you plan to only have a breeding career of 2 or 3 years hardly worth the risk.

At the end of the day though there's a puppy buyer out there with a very sick puppy I'm sure the last thing on their mind would be fraud.
Also are you sure they could prove it, theres always blips with any health tests.

An anomaly like that would, reasonably, lead to an investigation which would reveal that the swab was not taken from the dog claimed because DNA not only supplies information about genes but provides solid identification. Just as good as a microchip, infact perhaps better as unfailing and irremovable just slightly less immediately accessable. If I was cheated in this way and had a sick puppy, suing for fraud with such ready evidence is definately something I would be considering.

To register a litter here in Germany and many other countries on the continent you have to have all health testing done on both parents aswell as 2 critiques of a very good or above in your own country and also DNA'd. The bitch and dog have to go in front of a panel who will go over your dog from nose to tail,check movement and temperment.
I'm going through it all with my male at the minute. He has had everything done and the 2 critiques so all I need to do now is wait until September for the breeding permission day to see if he will pass to be used later on in the year.

Jenny

I still think your missing the point here. Ok so you could sue, but there'd still be unhealthy puppies around and as most puppies are sold as seen I doubt you'd win as you'd have to prove beyond doubt that the tests were fake, and too do that you'd have to retest the parents, an unscrupulous breeder isnt going to give you permission.
Also I doubt the KC would help you fight your corner.
I think DNA test should only be carried out by a vet, and via a blood test.

We are not just talking about bad breeding practices ie putting two unsuitable animals together. I don't think you need to sue in a civil action fraudulently claiming a result would be a criminal offence and as such the police would be entitled to take that evidence whether you objected or not.
The KC have introduced DNA identification into the Accredited breeder scheme so I would imagine if they ever considered making health tests obligatory they would attach DNA identification to it as other countries have.
I might be wrong but I think the KC even now can ask for DNA testing in pedigree disputes so I think if you refused you would be unlikely to be able to continue to register puppies.