Registration Question
 

I see lots of breeder ads that state their puppies are CKC registered rather than AKC. Does it matter which kennel club your baby is registered with? Any dog that I've had has usually been AKC registered, so I just wasn't sure.
:aimeeyork

If your not breeding or showing for AKC events it should not matter.
But please make sure you check the enviroment where the adult dogs are kept as well as the puppies.Ask what testing they do and ask to see health records .

It really only matters what you like better IMO. My pup can be registered with APRI, but because i honestly don't care about dog shows and she's only a pet, will never be bred...i don't think i'll register her at all and save my money.

If you want a show dog, or a dog to breed, most people feel very passionately about using AKC. I'm not sure the difference between AKC and CKC other than American and Canada, i'm sure they both run their own dog shows, so you might check into that if you want to show...otherwise, to me, registries really don't matter all that much, as long as you are ok with it it's not that big of a concern for those of us with "pet only" yorkies

I'm not going to show and definitely not breeding, they will just be my little darlings. I'm getting them from someone I know, so that part is comforting. :)

then i definatly wouldn't worry about the registry...it's mostly just for showing, breeding or having peace of mind that your dog came from a stable pedigree without any other breed mixing or seeing if they came from champion show dogs or something...

pets are pets are pets, i don't think you probably have to worry about registries if you trust the person the dogs come from!! good luck on a new little one!! :)

AKC is generally the more respected registry--they are more stringent on making the breeders that use them tow the line, so to speak.

Does that mean that every CKC breeder is dishonest with poor quality dogs? No, not neccessarily.
Does that mean that every AKC breeder is honest and ethical? No, not at all.

You can have good and bad breeders using either kennel club. It's more important that you focus on the breeder and their overall practice itself rather than assuming you can correctly judge them and their program based of the KC they use alone.

:yeahthat:

The AKC is the only registry that requires DNA testing and does kennel inspections. When the AKC adopted these more stringent requirements, a lot of "alternative" registries like the CKC popped up.

The only way to be assured that you are getting a purebred puppy is to get one registered with the AKC. With that said, it is no guarantee of the quality of the puppy. You can end up with a Yorkie that is pretty far from the standard that has AKC papers.

Being AKC registered is a good starting point when you begin your search for a puppy. The next step is finding a breeder who adheres to the rules of the YTCA and does all the health and genetic screening beforehand, breeds dogs as close to the standard as possible, keeps puppies until they are at least 12 weeks old, etc.

About Dog Registries and Kennel Clubs

No, they are NOT the only KC that does kennel inspections, although their guildlines on those do tend to be much stricter and inspections, from what I understand seem to be more frequent/sporatic.
I see many times the "required DNA testing" brought up as a means to add to their credibility, but it doesn't neccessarily guarantee that the dog is a purebred. Plus, sires that are not frequently used are not required to have the same DNA testing done. All it guarantees is that if the breeder wasn't being honest, then they would be held accountable.

Again, all reasons why being aware of what indicates and honest, ethical breeder should always come FIRST.

Yes, I agree that it is a good starting point, but it does not neccessarily assure you are dealing with an ethical breeder--likewise, usage of an alternative registry does not automatically mean the breeder is dishonest, not breeding to the same code of ethics, adhering to the standard or having the same medical/genetic tests performed.

Personally, I would never pay for a dog that wasn't AKC registered or could be. Right now, all 6 of mine are, although I have had many dogs that haven't been in the past, but I didn't pay money for them.

[QUOTE=francis53;2776728]Personally, I would never pay for a dog that wasn't AKC registered or could be. Right now, all 6 of mine are, although I have had many dogs that haven't been in the past, but I didn't pay money for them.[/QUOTE

I agree. :thumbup:

As I say, AKC registered is my bare minimum requirement, a starting point, in researching a breeder.

[quote=Ladymom;2776736]I agree it is a good starting point.

Everyone has their preferences depending on what their goals are and what they are looking for. :)

I prefer to support breeders who register with the AKC because they are the only club that allows breeder to sell with limited registration. Not every dog should be bred, and a good breeder knows this. Unfortunately some people go ahead and buy an AKC registered puppy and breed them anyway, and because the puppy had no breeding rights there offspring isn't eligible for the AKC, so breeders turn to the CKC. The CKC will register any dog, including mixed breeds, and while they may have inspections if a complaint is received, the AKC is the only registry that has routine unannounced inspections. The AKC is also the only registry that has a published suspension list, and I believe that they are really trying to rid themselves of poor breeders, however these suspended breeders just go to one of the alternative registries. By the way, most pet owners aren't breeding or showing, only a very small minority are, but we should all support good breeding practices. I hope pet owners can become more involved with the AKC and its membership includes pet owners as well as breeders.

Just to comment on a few points you brought up...

That I can completely understand and agree with! I don't understand why this would not be an option for EVERY registry. :(

If that is the case, then the same could be said about what the AKC does now. I still fail to see how the two are different in that aspect? I guess it all depends on what you define as "registered." The dogs are not registered and declared as a breed of their own--you basically would recieve a certificate that stated the dog was from this Dam who was XXX breed and this Sire that was XXX breed. But that is the extent of it--no pups produced from that dog can be given any form of recognition or certificate.

Nope, not true. CKC does that too. Just not as stringently and not as frequently.

Very true, but all that really means is that it is more convenient for people trying to access that info, not that the same type information isn't still available through CKC or other registries. I fail to see how publishing it makes them more credible?


Couldn't agree with you more on these points! I can't stress enough how important I think it is that people support ethical breeders and always stress to know what common red flags to look for. Supporting shady breeders only empowers them to continue what they are doing. I just don't think that the AKC is void of unethical breeders, nor to I think that any breeder not using AKC is neccessarily one of the bad guys.

Granted, I would DEFINATELY be more wary automatically in regards to any breeder using anything BUT AKC. However, that is where investigation of them and their overall breeding practice comes into play, which is something you need to do REGARDLESS of what registry they are using. IMO, it's not wise (or fair) to label one's breeding ethics based of the registry they use alone...get more facts first.