Limited Registration Concerns

[Ladyhawk]

Who are you to tell these people, who YOU hand picked to raise your puppy..you know...the ones that filled out your three page puppy application and did everything you asked..., that they can not do exactly what you are doing?
I guess I'd have to answer this by saying I am the person who spent years studying the standard and still study constantly. I am the person who hand selected this female and this male to compliment each other. I'm the one who paid the vet bills and did the pedigree searches. I'm the one who had the pups evaluated by 2 different respected breeders to help me decide who was show/breed potential and who should not be bred and go to loving pet homes. I sell the pet pups at pet prices and keep the show pups to either show myself or place in show homes. If someone sincerely wants to start their own breeding program for the betterment of the breed I am more than happy to help them but I won't sell them a pet quality pup.

[erickajm]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

Sadly, this one statement alone indicates the problem. There shouldn't be different "types" of Yorkies. Hmm...different 'types' of Yorkies, but still just one standard....

My personal opinion is also that if you place your dogs with full breeding rights, no questions asked, then IMO you are not doing the breed any favors, should NOT be breeding period and not the type person I would want a dog from. (And that is putting it VERY mildly.)

And again, it is VERY unfortunate that this is the "norm" and what SHOULD be done everytime is "uncommon."

As far as this being a problem with other breeds, I can imagine it is, just on a much smaller scale. I know that Shih Tzus are very common in my area and it is a problem with them as well.

I agree.

As far as the other breeds, again..I agree. Yorkies have become such a popular breed especially here the past few or so years with celebrities now toting them around...it is a breed that "everybody" wants....so...after looking for one...seeing the prices and now in desperation..the majority of the "everybody" will go to the cheaper ones that are registered by joe shmoe or the designer mutts because they at least resemble one or it is at least 1/2 yorkie.

I typically don't get riled up when the teacup name is mentioned...I get more riled up with the whole designer B.S...it disgusts me! I have never and will never pay for a mutt...which, cute or not, is still just that...a mutt.

Off my soapbox...

[erickajm]

Originally Posted by Ladyhawk

Who are you to tell these people, who YOU hand picked to raise your puppy..you know...the ones that filled out your three page puppy application and did everything you asked..., that they can not do exactly what you are doing?
I guess I'd have to answer this by saying I am the person who spent years studying the standard and still study constantly. I am the person who hand selected this female and this male to compliment each other. I'm the one who paid the vet bills and did the pedigree searches. I'm the one who had the pups evaluated by 2 different respected breeders to help me decide who was show/breed potential and who should not be bred and go to loving pet homes. I sell the pet pups at pet prices and keep the show pups to either show myself or place in show homes. If someone sincerely wants to start their own breeding program for the betterment of the breed I am more than happy to help them but I won't sell them a pet quality pup.

Well...I kind of said some of this...only with the F bomb thrown in a couple of times... oops! I think he understood my feelings better though...

[bchgirl]

Originally Posted by erickajm

Well...I kind of said some of this...only with the F bomb thrown in a couple of times... oops! I think he understood my feelings better though...

Maybe the delicate way you phrased it.

[Woogie Man]

Interesting discussion. And with every region of the country having its own alternative registry with no possibility of limited registration, it only makes the mindset harder to break. AKC could make limited the default registration for any pup unless specified by the breeder. That could take some pressure off breeders having to explain themselves to every potential owner. I doubt you'll see this, though, as they would see this as hurting the bottom line. The one thing about limited registration, though, is that it's reversible by the breeder. Maybe if this were explained to potential owners that it COULD be reversed at the breeder's request, it may make the idea more palatable to some and get them thinking about preserving the lines. Or.....and this is a crazy idea, how about an alternative registry that is tighter than AKC on its registration requirements. Two things that come to mind would be limited registration as the default registration with full registration only given at the breeder's request and then only after proof of appropriate health screenings were done. Maybe AKC could have some kind of 'preferred' registration. You kill two birds with one stone that way. You protect the lines and you make for a healthier breed. Now that's what I call betterment of the breed.

[hasrv4fun]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

True, but not the point I was trying to make. It's not the people getting the dog that I was complaining about...

I know just what you mean Lynn...I found a long time ago that if the first statement out of my mouth is, "they come with a restriction on being bred" formerly interested parties are generally quick to end the conversation. No skin off my back, saves me time....

Right , it shortens the time i have to spend on the phone if they stop there when i inform them iof breeding rights only with prior approval and that's not often as I sell most every thing "Limited"

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

This weekend, I met a lady and PetSmart and got to talkin' Yorkies with her. To cut out a bunch of boring details, long story short, she had never heard of the concept of selling a dog w/out breeding rights. She thought that it just meant a breeder/owner agreement not to use the breeder's kennel name. When I told her it meant 'no breeding the dog whatsoever,' she acted as if it was the most absurd thing she'd ever heard of! It actually came across that she was offended and mad that I had said that--kind of took on a very "who do you think you are for suggesting that" attitude. And this was just a stranger I was randomly chatting with on the PetSmart isle who saw my Yorkie purse! This makes one of several people I've run across lately who thought the whole idea was out of the question.

Optomistically, I would *hope* that this was a common practice with breeders--that those who truly 'don't care' would be the minority. Sadly, it seems just the opposite though. It seems that taking the neccessary precautions to ensure offspring are not bred is something that very FEW actually do....even here on YT.

To me, it does not reflect well on a breeder who willingly sends their pups off with little or no regard to how many future litters that dog *could* possiblly be responsible for bringing into this world. It just baffles me that any breeder could "dedicate" themselves to what is best for their dogs and the breed and then turn around and send their dog off w/ no restrictions on breeding--or even worse, PROMOTING the dog for breeding--and not even have a clue as to if the dog will be of a quality that *should* be bred.

I find it all very disheartening. And what I have found lately that just makes me almost sick is that it seems like a foreign concept for breeders to withhold rights to everyone and that they can't even "understand" why anyone would do that. A bit of thinking outloud I suppose, but it's frustrating and I really just don't get it....

Most breeders just aren't that concerned about the breed as a "whole." This is one topic you and I agree, but that has alway been my concern with some of the other registries, they will allow you to list a dog purchased without breeding rights and register the puppies anyway. That's a huge problem for me, and I believe the AKC is the only registry that won't allow this.

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

Most breeders just aren't that concerned about the breed as a "whole." This is one topic you and I agree, but that has alway been my concern with some of the other registries, they will allow you to list a dog purchased without breeding rights and register the puppies anyway. That's a huge problem for me, and I believe the AKC is the only registry that won't allow this.

It really has nothing to do with registries...at least not the point I was trying to make... I DO understand and agree with your point in concerning that though.

In this instance it has nothing to do with being able to re-register a dog w/ limited registration....more so that point that it seems few are restricting breeding rights to begin with. Evident by the fact that it seems to be an unheard of concept with most people. Almost equally as disturbing that potential owners don't see it as a huge red flag if a breeder doesn't require it.

IMO, not placing a dog in a home where it will be bred is not a responsibility that can be left up to marking a box on a piece of paper, regardless of what registry it is. Nor should it be. So that is an irrelevant point. A breeder has to step up and take whatever precautions neccessary within their power to make sure that the no-breeding agreement is held up on both ends...be it iron clad contract requiring proof of s/n or s/n before placing the pup. It's not easy or even a possibility in some situations, but if you're not even trying to begin with...

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by Woogie Man

Maybe AKC could have some kind of 'preferred' registration. You kill two birds with one stone that way. You protect the lines and you make for a healthier breed. Now that's what I call betterment of the breed.

There are some registries that actually HAVE implemented this type of program, even that allow the breeders to place the dogs with official limited registration, but then they turn around and shoot themselves in the foot by allowing the dog to be registered without using the pedigree, so it is pointless in that aspect. It does wonders to help a prospective buyer select a breeder that has to meet certain requirements regarding kennel standards and health screening, but still doesn't provide any benefits to the breeder and the dog.

[Ladymom]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

Almost equally as disturbing that potential owners don't see it as a huge red flag if a breeder doesn't require it.

Uneducated buyers have to share some of the responsibility for all the health problems in Yorkies now and the fact that so many of the Yorkies out there don't even look like Yorkies anymore.

I read an article a few years ago that said that people spend more time researching which microwave to buy than they do in selecting the breeder to buy a puppy from.

[DukesMommy]

Neither of mine had limited registration, Duke is neutered and I plan on having Lucie spayed. I honestly didn't even know what it was until this past year.
When I first learned of it, I thought it could be kind of offensive to tell someone I will sell the dog but you can't breed it, but after I thought about it, it all made more sense because even people who pay a lot for a dog, may not have good intentions.
I always thought, if you are going to pay a lot for a dog, you wouldn't do anything harmful towards it...
Now I think it's a good idea, I think if you intend to breed you could discuss that with the breeder, like proving you will be a good breeder with the dog. I would rather prove myself and have someone agree to let me breed, rather than look for someone who couldn't care less what I did with the dog.

Wow, didn't think my post was going to be so long!

[mohawkmalli]

I think that once you purchase a pup that it is yours to do what you will with it and if you want to breed it yes you should educate yourself but to me a breeder may see it that if you breed the puppy you bought then that is money out of their pocket....but this is just my opinion.

[YorkieRose]

When you say the dog is yours to do as you please..that is not quite accurate..my name is forever printed on those AKC papers...one generation of improper breeding wrecks 35 yrs of hard work and can damage my reputation..the country is full of breeders who do not care if you breed their stock, so I advise buyers to buy from them.

[jencar98]

Originally Posted by mohawkmalli

I think that once you purchase a pup that it is yours to do what you will with it and if you want to breed it yes you should educate yourself but to me a breeder may see it that if you breed the puppy you bought then that is money out of their pocket....but this is just my opinion.

It isn't about the money with the reputable breeders I'm aware of...it's about the welfare of their puppies and having their name in the exhibitor/breeding world trashed by irresponsible pet owners that want to make a buck.

For the average byb it's probably a combination of not knowing what limited registration means and the lack of truly caring about the breed and maintaining the integrity of the breed.

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by DukesMommy

I always thought, if you are going to pay a lot for a dog, you wouldn't do anything harmful towards it...

That was what I thought too years ago. Unfortunately, many don't care about the price...they may pay 1500 for a pup, but think in their heads, "Wow, if 1 pup is this much, imagine what I could get for a whole litter if I sold them myself!" They either aren't aware of the costs of breeding, or don't care. All they are concerned about is profit. And once that is what someone has their mind set on, it can be hard to pursuade them to think otherwise. Someone of that mindset clearly doesn't have the dog's best interest at heart in the first place.