Registry doesn't really mean much of anything if you aren't interested in showing... however I have found that in many instances unethical breeders often use breed registries as a stepping stone for making themselves sound more legitimate. Unfortunately I think the CKC has suffered because of this with their guidelines.
To register a dog with no current registries:
CKC: requires two signatures that certify the dog fits the breed standard along with photos for any dog that's not already registered.
AKC: requires that the dog already be listed in an acceptable registry in the US (like the National Greyhound Association or North American Sheep Dog Society for example) and then you have to along the pedigree from that registry along with photographs.
None of this means you get a better dog... with the AKC you're just getting a dog with papers from a club that cares a lot more about qualifications so to speak. Ideally I would love to see some registry come about that focuses on health and genetic testing - but there will always be ways for people to get around things if they are really set on it.
Neither really assure you anything. The CKC has been tainted by the fact that it is very easy for your average BYB to register their dogs there, and the CKC registry makes them sound that much more legit. There are most definetely some decent CKC breeders out there. IMO I think how the breeder advertises their registry listing matters so much more. Someone who focuses so much more on just the registry versus the health and line of the dog is much more likely to be someone riding on a registry without focusing on the traits that matter.
Registries are really... just pieces of paper. Its the health of the dog and the conditions that mean so much more... registries don't insure those things, but from a personal perspective - I've found that individuals who focus on where their line came from with certainly (so they have the ability to follow the various genetic issues) tend to have happier and healthier dogs. |