AKC considers MIXBREED Program

[bchgirl]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

I didn't realize there were any registries now that would register a litter that was the result of a registered mixed breed dog? Also, what would be the point of registering a brood bitch if you couldn't register the pups?

You can't register a brood bitch in the AKC mixed program...it's for neutered dogs, remember?


I still think if someone owns say...a morkie and wants papers...they would want those papers to say...morkie and not just mixed.

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by bchgirl

Here ya go....

achclub

That's just...distrubing. Had no idea there were any "organizations" out there doing that.

Originally Posted by bchgirl

You can't register a brood bitch in the AKC mixed program...it's for neutered dogs, remember?

Understood. What I mean is, as far as breeding is concerned, why would it matter? If you can't register a litter produced by the dog, what would it matter if the dog was s/n or not?

Originally Posted by bchgirl

I still think if someone owns say...a morkie and wants papers...they would want those papers to say...morkie and not just mixed.

Oh I completely agree that they probably do...that's evident by the people who insist on calling them any of those names and who get on their high horses anytime someone calls them mutts.

[MinMuf1]

WOAH, interesting post...

[YorkichonBella]

YAY! So glad to hear some positive news & that AKC shows alot of class by calling them mixed breeds, which they are.
I knew without a doubt, someone would bring up negativity using the word mutt.

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by YorkichonBella

I knew without a doubt, someone would bring up negativity using the word mutt.

Any dog that is not a purebred is, by definition, a mutt...despite efforts to make it seem like something meant negatively, it's really not. (Of course, you and I have been over this time and time again...) It's never negative until someone looks to be offended by it...generally speaking, if it offends you, that's a personal issue, not something to rally the troops over and force upon the masses.

The best dog I ever owned was a mutt and if I could have 100 of him today, I would. LOL...I highly doubt that if the AKC called it the "Registered Mutt Division" that there would be many owners willing to spend their money with them. Truth be told, it's probably got less to do with their "class" and more to do with what will make them more $$$.

[bchgirl]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

That's just...distrubing. Had no idea there were any "organizations" out there doing that.


Understood. What I mean is, as far as breeding is concerned, why would it matter? If you can't register a litter produced by the dog, what would it matter if the dog was s/n or not?



Oh I completely agree that they probably do...that's evident by the people who insist on calling them any of those names and who get on their high horses anytime someone calls them mutts.

Enterprising soul with the ambition of making $$.

If the dog is neutered it insures there aren't any off spring. There are breeders out there...who would register their mix breed dogs soley so they could offer...AKC registered puppies and that's the reason that enterprising soul created the hybrid registry. People like to quote...their dog came with papers. Often times it doesn't matter what registry nor it's validity...but they have papers, ya know?

[bchgirl]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

LOL...I highly doubt that if the AKC called it the "Registered Mutt Division" that there would be many owners willing to spend their money with them.

L-LOL....

When we owned our "designer dog" and people asked what she was....the reply was just a mutt.

[YorkichonBella]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

Any dog that is not a purebred is, by definition, a mutt...despite efforts to make it seems like something meant negatively, it's really not. (Of course, you and I have been over this time and time again...) It's never negative until someone looks to be offended by it...generally speaking, if it offends you, that's a personal issue, not something to rally the troops over and force upon the masses.

The best dog I ever owned was a mutt and if I could have 100 of him today, I would.

That's just 'your' opinion. Clearly, owners of mixed breed dogs whose breeds are known do not want their dog to be considered a name that means the breeds are 'not known'.
It will be 'interesting' to see if any opinions do change.

[carmen in nj]

I thought it was an interesting article. it was discussed in my holistic dog group last night. we are wondering as the so call "Designer Dogs" get more and more attention what the AKC will do.. just wondering..
hugs,
cArmen in nj

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by bchgirl

If the dog is neutered it insures there aren't any off spring.

Right...and THAT I agree with and think it's very responsible of them to require that a dog be s/n...no pups, regardless to if they could be registered or not.

Originally Posted by bchgirl

There are breeders out there...who would register their mix breed dogs soley so they could offer...AKC registered puppies

True...but for the registries that wouldn't allow a litter of mix to be registered, it wouldn't matter if the dog was s/n or not, right? If the sole purpose would be to register the dogs so that the offpspring would be papered, it would be pointless if the offspring couldn't be registered in the first place, right? (I don't think I'm doing a very good job of trying to convey my point here.)

[Nikki+2]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

Really? I didn't realize that...which registries do that? I knew that a few would register them as a mixed breed dog, but did not know they actually referred to them as the given designer names on the paperwork. Also, I didn't think that you could register the offspring of those dogs registered as mixes as far as registering the whole litter...

Here's another disturbing one Designer Breed Registry a registry for not only designer dogs your designer dog can be titled. I thought the ARPI and ACA did as well but perhaps I'm wrong. I took a quick look at their websites but don't feel like sifting through them.

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by YorkichonBella

That's just 'your' opinion. Clearly, owners of mixed breed dogs whose breeds are known do not want their dog to be considered a name that means the breeds are 'not known'.

Nope...it's not just "my opinion." Is a fact. Look it up in a dictionary. The name "mutt" is not limited to dogs of unknown breeds.

From Webster's Online Dictionary.
Main Entry: mutt
Pronunciation: \ˈmət\
Function: noun
2 : a mongrel dog : cur

Main Entry: mon·grel
Pronunciation: \ˈmäŋ-grəl, ˈməŋ-\
Function: noun
1: an individual resulting from the interbreeding of diverse breeds or strains
2: a cross between types of persons or things


From Princeton WorldNet:
mutt
noun
an inferior dog or one of mixed breed [syn: cur]

From MSN Encarta

mutt [ mut ] (plural mutts)
noun
Definition:
1. mongrel dog: a dog that is of mixed or unknown breed ( slang )

[YorkichonBella]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

Nope...it's not just "my opinion." Is a fact. Look it up in a dictionary. The name "mutt" is not limited to dogs of unknown breeds.

From Webster's Online Dictionary.
Main Entry: mutt
Pronunciation: ˈmət
Function: noun
2 : a mongrel dog : cur

Main Entry: mon·grel
Pronunciation: ˈmäŋ-grəl, ˈməŋ-
Function: noun
1: an individual resulting from the interbreeding of diverse breeds or strains
2: a cross between types of persons or things

yeah yeah .....we have been over this before. And this is another definition.
A mixed breed dog is any dog that is not a purebred, often a mixture of two different purebred dogs.

But then, I'm wondering WHY r we even going back & forth with this?? Oh yeah, because it was brought up, out of the air. Not because it was mentioned in the ARTICLE at all. Just a thought??

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by YorkichonBella

yeah yeah .....we have been over this before. And this is another definition.
A mixed breed dog is any dog that is not a purebred, often a mixture of two different purebred dogs.

I don't believe that anyone ever said that referring to them as a "mixed breed" was incorrect....? It that is the term you prefer, then that is your own preference.

I was merely addressing your mistatment regarding something as only being "my opinion." That statement, is in fact, not correct.

Originally Posted by YorkichonBella

But then, I'm wondering WHY r we even going back & forth with this?? Oh yeah, because it was brought up, out of the air. Not because it was mentioned in the ARTICLE at all. Just a thought??

Because once again, you took personl offense to a term that was being used correctly in a conversation and deamed it as negativity, when that wasn't how it was intended.. Until that point, the conversation was discussing the subject matter of the original post.

[bchgirl]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

Right...and THAT I agree with and think it's very responsible of them to require that a dog be s/n...no pups, regardless to if they could be registered or not.



True...but for the registries that wouldn't allow a litter of mix to be registered, it wouldn't matter if the dog was s/n or not, right? If the sole purpose would be to register the dogs so that the offpspring would be papered, it would be pointless if the offspring couldn't be registered in the first place, right? (I don't think I'm doing a very good job of trying to convey my point here.)

Ya think? I read that....and your earlier reply 3 times. What is your point exactly???? LOL. Kidding...I think I understand.

Btw, don't you have a parti/biewer thread to reply to today?