Would you give me your opinion on this?

[BamaFan121s]

I think that it would be a very hard thing to prevent. I think the best option we have at this point is to hope that other members know what red flags to look for.

[Mardelin]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

I think that it would be a very hard thing to prevent. I think the best option we have at this point is to hope that other members know what red flags to look for.

You're right....there are so many ways around the rules....Especially if your intention is just to sell puppies.

[livingdustmops]

I understand this would not be a perfect fix but it would help with a few. Sad to say many people can see the red flags even when they are being waved in their face....

YT should not be thought as a place for free advertising for selling dogs.

[WV~Yorkies]

I have seen 2 post just yesterday with pups that the father was limited registeration and can't be registered.. this is sad...

[yorkiemama1986]

Originally Posted by WV~Yorkies

I have seen 2 post just yesterday with pups that the father was limited registeration and can't be registered.. this is sad...

true but you can't think everyone has bad intentions. I could care less about selling puppies. And mine was an "oops". Leaving for a month and her becoming pregnant...etc. And yea after my friend came back from Switzerland i found out her male was limited so they cant be reg

[WV~Yorkies]

I just think there is no reason to keep a limited male intacted. If they followed the rules an oops couldn't happen.

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by yorkiemama1986

true but you can't think everyone has bad intentions.

Hmmm...bad intentions? No, not all of the time. Disregard for the breeder and not living up to one's end of the bargain i(f there was an agreement made)? Yes, accidental or not.
Generally speaking, many "accidents" are easily avoided, IMO. I feel that when an "accident" is something that could have been easily prevented, it ceases to be an "accident" and is instead "irresponsibility."

[WV~Yorkies]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

Hmmm...bad intentions? No, not all of the time. Disregard for the breeder and not living up to one's end of the bargain i(f there was an agreement made)? Yes, accidental or not.
Generally speaking, many "accidents" are easily avoided, IMO. I feel that when an "accident" is something that could have been easily prevented, it ceases to be an "accident" and is instead "irresponsibility."

[BonBon]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

Hmmm...bad intentions? No, not all of the time. Disregard for the breeder and not living up to one's end of the bargain i(f there was an agreement made)? Yes, accidental or not.
Generally speaking, many "accidents" are easily avoided, IMO. I feel that when an "accident" is something that could have been easily prevented, it ceases to be an "accident" and is instead "irresponsibility."

And this person had 6 years to neuter her boy and prevent 'accidents'.

[halandshawnie]

Originally Posted by jamiee

Mardelin...I'm sure you are a wonderful breeder. I will say this again...I am not a breeder. I happen to have 2 pets that I consider my children and they had a litter. I am trying to find these puppies the best homes I can find. I'm not quite sure how you think I am putting my dogs' welfare upfront.
The breeder did not have a contract when I bought my dog, therefore, I am not breaching anything. The immaturity sets in when you all gang up on the new person by acting like everyone should know what you, as a breeder knows. That is absurd.
All of you should go to the AKC website and read about limited registration. The first sentence states exactly what I originally said...that since my boy has limited registration, his offspring can not be registered. I never had a contract so why would I be doing something wrong here??

Setting AKC & Limited registration aside, I think there are other issues forum members here have with this, and the Limited registration just made it worse. When I adopted by girl, she was already pregnant, and the same people that you are calling "immature" are the one who have helped me thru a very difficult time. I'm sorry to say it, but in fairness you are the one acted immature. Sure, maybe according to AKC you can breed your male, and just not register the puppies, but is that the right thing to do? This isn't a six month old male, he's six years old, what did you think would happed when you put him with an intact female? They were just gonna cuddle????

You said yourself that you're not a breeder, so why keep the two intact in the first place? Maybe you were lucky, and had a free whelp with healthy happy pups, but what if something went wrong? Learning how to tube feed on the fly with u tube videos isn't the greatest thing in the world, for you or the pups. Do you have an adoption contract, so this doesn't happen to the puppies? Being RESPONSIBLE and getting them fixed prevents that. And you can throw AKC regulations at people who have champion lines all you want, but you are not breeding AKC dogs, and you are sending them to homes two weeks before you should (from my understanding). IMHO that is immature, and irresponsible.

Just admit that it wasn't the right thing to do, get help finding wonderful homes for the babies, where they will be loved, ask some of the great rescue volunteers on here for samples of their adoption contracts, so you can make sure your puppies are never bred, have your babies fixed, and move on.

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by bonbon

I just re-read what I wrote and it's not everything I meant to say. Sorry, this has just pushed my hot button today. I believe that the good breeders care deeply about their yorkies and any puppies they produce. I think this caring and concern comes (or should come) well before anything else for them.

I am curious though - why would a breeder go to the trouble of selling on limited registration and then not follow up with the new owner?

If the new owner does not stay in contact, how are you going to follow up? The best way to do it would be to hold on to a deposit until they show proof of spay neuter.

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by bonbon

This is interesting....I just got a pm from WenK and I now have another question for you terrific breeders.

She says that "the AKC policy on limited registration does not say anything about a spay-neuter clause." And "If this lady doesn't have a spay-neuter clause then it is her right to choose to breed her dogs if she wants to."

Do you agree? Is it her right, or is she just abusing the trust the breeder placed in her?

I guess I thought limited meant "NO BREEDING". But as I said before, even with the best contract, the catching comes before the hanging. If they refuse to stay in contact, how you going to enforce it.

You could state that they have to show proof of spay/neuter by a certain age, or the seller has the right to take the dog back.

[tjdmom]

I just don't understand how or why someone would buy a dog from a person who bred a pet with a limited registration. Contract or not, we all know what that means and to me it just seems so dishonest.

[magicgenie]

I'm thinking of glass houses and the sinless casting stones, etc. OK, never mind.

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by tjdmom

I just don't understand how or why someone would buy a dog from a person who bred a pet with a limited registration. Contract or not, we all know what that means and to me it just seems so dishonest.

Because there are more uninformed people out there than there are informed ones. The buyers probably thought her explanation was reasonable.

Go and ask 10 people that own pets but do not breed, what limited registration means and I bet 9 out of the 10 will not know.