Sire's Papers?

[YorkieRose]

Limited means...any pups from that sire or dam will not be eligable for AKC regs. It does not mean the buyer can not breed the dog. IF the breeder sells with no attached contract stating no breeding and pup will be spayed..then the buyer has the right to breed with full knowledge they are not breeding registered dogs.
If the breeder does not want their dogs bred, they must put this in writing or they must S/N before sale, sell with contract to S/N..simply letting a pup go with Limited regs insures nothing to the breeder, except any pups will not be registered from that particular dog.

[BamaFan121s]

The dog was originally placed on limited registration, without papers, as a pet, regardless of the reasons why. The dog should have never been bred. Period. If this is something that you and the stud's owner didn't know about until after the fact, then the blame is yours for not researching and understanding the situation in advance. (Honestly, it kind of baffles me that two people would breed to begin with when they don't even understand the ins and outs of registering the dogs.)

Furthermore, you say you have a dog that from this litter that you are considering using as a stud in the future. IMO, from a moral standpoint, that option shouldn't even be up for consideration. The sire of the litter should have never been used for breeding, per the original sales agreement...therefore, neither should any offspring he's produced.

This is a prime example of why more and more RESPONSIBLE breeders are having their pups altered before placing them in their new homes.

[yorkiemama1986]

Originally Posted by Ladymom

What registry are you talking about? If it's not AKC and is one of the many alternative "paper" registries, it's not worth anyone's time, effort and money to try to get papers. They won't be worth anything.

so if they AREN'T reg with AKC they are worth squat? They means half the yorkies in the world are worthless?

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by yorkiemama1986

so if they AREN'T reg with AKC they are worth squat? They means half the yorkies in the world are worthless?

I don't think that's what she's saying at all. I don't think she's implying that the dogs wouldn't be worth anything...just that the papers wouldn't be worth anything. And in this specific case, she's right.

[yorkiemama1986]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

I don't think that's what she's saying at all. I don't think she's implying that the dogs wouldn't be worth anything...just that the papers wouldn't be worth anything. And in this specific case, she's right.

And i understand that to a degree, but it has come up more than once that if a person wants a yorkie they ONLY want AKC. I just find it discriminating to the poor pups. And a lot of people find no value in a certain breed without these "quality papers". I don't find papers the most important thing if only looking for a family pet. Hell shelters don't adopt you out pets with papers now do they..lol

[yorkiemama1986]

Now with the whole being sold on "limited reg" aspect i agree with....the dogs should not have been bred

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by yorkiemama1986

a lot of people find no value in a certain breed without these "quality papers". I don't find papers the most important thing if only looking for a family pet.

For the record, I don't think that is the most important factor either. There are good and bad breeders in ANY registry. I don't see it as 'discrimination', just a personal preference, and everyone is entitled to their opinions on it, IMO.

[yorkiemama1986]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

For the record, I don't think that is the most important factor either. There are good and bad breeders in ANY registry. I don't see it as 'discrimination', just a personal preference, and everyone is entitled to their opinions on it, IMO.

UnderstoodNo arguement here. On my end i could care less about papers. Even though my girl was papered her pups will not be.

[Mardelin]

Originally Posted by yorkiemama1986

UnderstoodNo arguement here. On my end i could care less about papers. Even though my girl was papered her pups will not be.

AKC Registration does not gurantee you a quality dog.....or that your dog has come from a Reputable Breeder.

But, it is the Registry most desired......it does give you a bit more leverage should there be any dispute over the parentage of a dog and/or if there is question of the dogs pure bred status.....

Let me add, that anyone knowingly breeding a dog on limited registration, in my opinion has put themselves in the category of a BYBer.

My pups are placed with limited registration with a spay/nueter contract. Within that contract should an unauthorized breeding take place, I have the right to confiscate the litter and the dog.

However, everyone knows a contract is only as good as the two people signing it......But, reputable breeders are adding a $5,000 breech of contract fee in their contracts and it is holding up.

[yorkiemama1986]

Originally Posted by Mardelin

AKC Registration does not gurantee you a quality dog.....or that your dog has come from a Reputable Breeder.

But, it is the Registry most desired......it does give you a bit more leverage should there be any dispute over the parentage of a dog and/or if there is question of the dogs pure bred status.....

Let me add, that anyone knowingly breeding a dog on limited registration, in my opinion has put themselves in the category of a BYBer.

My pups are placed with limited registration with a spay/nueter contract. Within that contract should an unauthorized breeding take place, I have the right to confiscate the litter and the dog.

However, everyone knows a contract is only as good as the two people signing it......But, reputable breeders are adding a $5,000 breech of contract fee in their contracts and it is holding up.

IMHO wouldn't it just be easier to have the litter S/N before selling and placing in homes? Then you would never have to question whether or not those people are holding up there end of the deal.

[Cares4Dogs]

Originally Posted by yorkiemama1986

IMHO wouldn't it just be easier to have the litter S/N before selling and placing in homes? Then you would never have to question whether or not those people are holding up there end of the deal.

It seems like that may be easier, but with puppies being homed at 12 weeks thats a little young/small to be having the surgery and add a whole litter to that-thats a HUGE commitment that the breeder may not be able to handle doing it solo. A spay/neuter contract is more logical.

Breeders already do so much for though i.e, dew claws, tail dockings, immunizations, vet checks, microchips, etc. there has to be an end to it somewhere. I do however agree though that the one way to ensure a limited reg dog doesnt have pups is to spay before hand or enforce breech of contract.

[yorkiemama1986]

Originally Posted by Cares4Dogs

It seems like that may be easier, but with puppies being homed at 12 weeks thats a little young/small to be having the surgery and add a whole litter to that-thats a HUGE commitment that the breeder may not be able to handle doing it solo. A spay/neuter contract is more logical.

Breeders already do so much for though i.e, dew claws, tail dockings, immunizations, vet checks, microchips, etc. there has to be an end to it somewhere. I do however agree though that the one way to ensure a limited reg dog doesnt have pups is to spay before hand or enforce breech of contract.

True it must all end somewhere but people got into breeding somehow knowing the expenses that may occur. And i would just assume the best thing would be to have it done before hand, even if that means holding onto them a little while longer, but it can also be placed in the price. I like the breech of contract thing too but how legit is it? And how would you ever know that was your dog you sold? And yes we (people who have dogs who have had litters) have incurred a lot of expenses but do you really think people care how much we've spent on these things? NO. I see so many people and talk to a bunch of people who want a pure-bred, papered, cute little fuffy dog that has all vaccines, dew claws done, tails docked, S/N, potty trained with accessories for 50 bucks. People are greedy, face it, the world has gone down the drain

Oh and i might add, they say it was our fault to breed them and all the expenses were on us and that was our responsibility so why should they have to pay??

[Cares4Dogs]

Originally Posted by yorkiemama1986

True it must all end somewhere but people got into breeding somehow knowing the expenses that may occur. And i would just assume the best thing would be to have it done before hand, even if that means holding onto them a little while longer, but it can also be placed in the price. I like the breech of contract thing too but how legit is it? And how would you ever know that was your dog you sold? And yes we (people who have dogs who have had litters) have incurred a lot of expenses but do you really think people care how much we've spent on these things? NO. I see so many people and talk to a bunch of people who want a pure-bred, papered, cute little fuffy dog that has all vaccines, dew claws done, tails docked, S/N, potty trained with accessories for 50 bucks. People are greedy, face it, the world has gone down the drain

Oh and i might add, they say it was our fault to breed them and all the expenses were on us and that was our responsibility so why should they have to pay??

I think this is just looking too deep into it. I think responsible placement of puppies goes a long way and it would not happen more often that it does. I dont think I've ever heard anyone say that the breeder is responsible for paying for spay/neutering of their pets and feel they shouldnt have to pay that expense.

Anyone who is gonna argue with a breeder over spaying/neutering should be told a big fat NO. I know people want something for nothing and should be told that if they cant afford the basic expenses of dog ownership to consider adopting a hamster (just one so they cant breed it and wont eat that much).

[Mardelin]

Originally Posted by yorkiemama1986

IMHO wouldn't it just be easier to have the litter S/N before selling and placing in homes? Then you would never have to question whether or not those people are holding up there end of the deal.

A valid point and many are doing just that. However, that would mean keeping the pups until they are a year, as studies have found that spay/nueter should not be done until the growth platelets are closed. Having the spay/nueter prior to this interrupts the growth pattern of the pup.

It is better that the breeder know and trust the families they are placing their pups with and conduct a thorough vetting process. Establish a good relationship with families. The transition of a pup into a new home shouldn't stop when that pup goes out the door with their new family.

[Mardelin]

Originally Posted by yorkiemama1986

True it must all end somewhere but people got into breeding somehow knowing the expenses that may occur. And i would just assume the best thing would be to have it done before hand, even if that means holding onto them a little while longer, but it can also be placed in the price. I like the breech of contract thing too but how legit is it? And how would you ever know that was your dog you sold? And yes we (people who have dogs who have had litters) have incurred a lot of expenses but do you really think people care how much we've spent on these things? NO. I see so many people and talk to a bunch of people who want a pure-bred, papered, cute little fuffy dog that has all vaccines, dew claws done, tails docked, S/N, potty trained with accessories for 50 bucks. People are greedy, face it, the world has gone down the drain

Oh and i might add, they say it was our fault to breed them and all the expenses were on us and that was our responsibility so why should they have to pay??

Yes, there are people that want everything for little money.......but, bottom line it is up to the breeder as to how to weed out those people. I have a lot of calls that begin with how much are your dogs? My response is to those people is: "You can't afford them" Rude? yes. But, these people are bargin shopping. If someone is more concerned with the cost of a puppy, more than their health and welfare, I don't want my pup in that home.