To answer the question in the op. I think that health, temperament and appearance all need to be taken into consideration when breeding.

If I had to order them though, I'd put health and temperament as being equal and above appearance, in situations where there are issues with either or both. Or where breeding for a look, will come to the detriment of one or the other. Otherwise, I'd say they should be as balanced as possible, esp for working dogs.

Its all well and good saying looks don't matter but, I'm afraid they do. If they didn't we wouldn't have so many breeds, as any dog would be physicly/anatomicly suited to any job.

You dont need the puppy to be KC registered to be able to check ancestry, you just need a pedigree certificate. 75% of puppy buyers dont even bother to change ownership.

I didnt say litters shouldnt be registered, I said that for the average pet owner, it didnt mean much. They wouldnt know about endorsements, how many litters a bitch can have etc.

What views?

yes you do, otherwise the "ancestry" could be a figment of the breeders imagination.

The argument that many owners dont know or care about registration, may have some truth in it , but that does not excuse the breeder from using the same argument.

If you breed , you should understand "everything" and do "all" health /temperament " tests before you breed, the fact some of your puppy buyers are ignorant about "registration" will be your responsibility to educate them.

It can be a figment anyway!

You have a better chance of knowing but every system can fall down.

rune

The KC is not the only registration body out there, and actually, there is nothing to stop people lying on that either, is there?

Mainly trust is put in breeders that they are telling the truth about the sires used, or even the dams (if the breeder happens to have multiple litters). Are there any safe guards out there?
How many breeders DNA to prove relationships?

As in any societal group, there are good and bad, honest and dishonest, etc. Good breeders build up a reputation by good breeding etc.

There are no guarantees in life, but that does not mean we should throw the baby out of the bathwater.

And of course ONE of the issues from an owner point of view, is no KC registration = no ability to participate in showing or field trials or gundog working tests, how many people who breed dogs without papers tell owners about this?

Of course ANY dog can go on the activity register and compete in all OTHER sports, but I know several people who have been dismayed at the realisation (with a gundog in particular) that they cannot compete; the same is true of rescue homes, they very rarely inform people of this.

I do not like this system, any more than I like the FCI system of pure dogs only being allowed to compete. I can see the reasoning with regards to furthering breeds etc, however, I do feel it is unfair and (possibly especially in the case of the Agility World Champs, and with last years HtM World champs.) can knock out a lot of the 'best' dogs.

Yes but you have to remember that the FCI system IS based on breeding issues (this is why the KC restricts show dogs, GWT and FT dogs re reg) and similar situations exist ie WUSV etc.

Existing mutts may be penalised but, as has been seen by the opening up of competition etc, handlers have moved over to BC for example rather than WSD. I am not saying this is right or wrong but if you want to play ANY game, you have to play by the rules!

This demonstrates why knowledge is so important.

Getting the odd unscrupulous person falsifying information, does not make the whole system unworkable.

Thats why most decent breeders DNA profile..Can prove everything then The KC is just an organisation - its down to the breeders to do the right thing, and do as much as possible to leave no cause for concern.