seller says i cant breed with bought dog using KC reg - can i?

[billathome65]

Hi I was not sure where to post this or if it will be able to be answered but here goes.

 

In October 2014 i bought a beautiful German Shepherd pup ( Male ) KC registered with KC registered name chosen by the breeder.

 

When I bought him the breeder informed me that I must sign a contract

stating that I could not allow him to bread Using his KC registered name

without express permission of the breaders

as they could not vouch for the females genetic credential

 

 

IE she may be a bad breeding match as German Shepherds are renowned for hip displacia.

 

 

My dogs parents have excellent hip scores meaning less likelihood of him being effected with the problem.

 

Whilst I am not looking to bread him anyway you never know someone may come to me with a good breeding dog

good credentials and I may wish to pick a new pup from that litter.

 

So the question is

 

 

what is the legal stand point of the breeders

 

 

should he breed a new litter and would that stop the owner of the female registering the pups

If my dogs KC name was being prevented?

 

Just a general question will be interesting to see if anyone can answer it.

 

Cheers Bill

[liverbird37]

I have a dog that is subject to the same rules.

 

 

She can be bred, but under no circumstances can her pups be registered with the KC.

 

The reason breeders do this is to ensure the continued health of their dogs line,

and ensure their rep as a breeder is not tainted by somebody churning out pups

that could potentially have been bred from a dog with potentially serious health issues.

 

 

This is not what any breeder wants from a dog that they have so carefully bred.

 

 

There are far too many people out there,

quick to breed dogs with no thought to the consequences,

should there be any health issues in the other dog.

 

 

No breeder wants an angry person laying the blame at their door should something go wrong.

 

 

This is the only way they can ensure that any pup they produce, is in the utmost of health.

 

Once a breeder specifies this condition,

then in no way can the pups be registered with the KC.

 

 

The stipulation is placed on the pups records, preventing this from happening.

 

 

Should somebody attempt to pass the pups off as KC,

hoping the buyer won't actually check for papers,

the the breeder can take legal action.

 

 

The stipulation on the pups papers, as far as I'm aware, is legally binding.

 

 

The owner can most certainly breed,

but the Kennel Club cannot & will not KC the pups

and give all the necessary paperwork whilst the breeding stipulation has been imposed by the breeders.

 

 

No way around that unless the breeders lift the stipulation off the pups database info.

 

 

No good breeder is likely to do that.

[billathome65]

Hi thanks for the input as I said I am not looking to breed my GS and understand the reasoning behind breeders stipulating such rules this is just a general queery as I find the whole KC process interesting, and I fully agree that there are far to many people out there using their dogs as puppy farms.

 

However I am aware that the KC has strict rules preventing conveyor belt breeding of dogs.

 

What I see here though is a monopoly situation arising where say a individual buys a pup and genuinely seeks to continue the good genetics breeding, however unless they go back to the breeder cap in hand and say do you have a female for my male ( As chances are they will not want another person breeding a female ) only the original breeder sees any financial benefit to be blunt.

 

My boys papers came stating I was not the registered owner and I have paid £15 to have the ownership changed over to me just because I am a very protective person when it comes to ownership matters. I am very paranoid when it comes to others holding all the aces when there are still 3 in the deck.

 

Anyway thanks for the reply I found it very revealing, my boy will have an appointment with MR. Sniper the vet soon :lol:

 

Cheers Bill

[caro]

I find this interesting too. My mother bred dogs on a small scale years ago and I think KC regs must have changed since then. She always registered the litter if I remember correctly, but didn't register names for the pups.

 

Puppy farms were a problem even then, and it was seen as an advantage to go to what you might call hobby breeders like my mother, as the pups were less likely to be in-bred, which could cause problems.

 

As it happens we had a beautiful long haired GSD, although never bred from her. I am well aware that hip displacia is a big problem in the breed and it is entirely right to try and prevent genetic problems going forward, but the concept of preventing a buyer breeding from their own dog in this way is new to me.

Edited February 7, 2015 by caro

[citizenB]

I wonder if the KC themselves have any comment to make on this ?

[billathome65]

c

I wonder if the KC themselves have any comment to make on this ?

 

May be worth an email to KC. It just seems to me that if breeders can set up their own contracts which are then backed by the KC this in turn produces a monopoly situation for breeders.

 

If it is the case that breeders can create their own laws how do new breeders start up? Seems very confusing to me. Surely if someone has a bitch that is KC registered and good pedigree can be proven on both sides there should be no restriction on registration?

 

This is interesting as I want to see who gives one breeder such authority and can dictate over others?

 

Bill

[hightail]

If you buy a KC registered dog then nobody can stop you breeding from it. The only thing you won't be able to do is register the pups. If you want to breed pedigree, KC registerable pups then be honest from the start. The KC is a private 'club' as are all registration bodies for all pedigree animals. Their members are perfectly entitled to suggest, vote on and make their own rules and regulations which affect only those who choose to be affected by them. Those who wish to be members and work within the organisation can do so and those who don't can do exactly as they please outside it. Hardly a monopoly on breeding.

[billathome65]

If you buy a KC registered dog then nobody can stop you breeding from it. The only thing you won't be able to do is register the pups. If you want to breed pedigree, KC registerable pups then be honest from the start.

 

As stated previously, I am not looking and will say was never looking to breed. The question was with respect to the terms of sanctions and their legal holding on others with respect to registering of pups that have been sired by a KC gegistered dog.

 

You say if someone wishes to be a member and work within the organization can do so, That's fine however if you have a dog cat ameoba that you wish to breed if the contract from the seller states you cannot register any of the offspring then being a member of said organization seems irrelevant.

 

The original post is not about saying i want to register pups I've made that very clear. It's about peeling back the layers and discussing the rights and wrongs of a policy which could be seen to create a manopoly. ( Definition of manopoly: the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service. ) I think a contractual sanction barring others involvement could be seen as creating a manopoly.

 

It is hoped that people don't become defensive over what should be a simple and sensible question deserving of some constructive feedback.

 

If someone is a member and breeder with the KC maybe you can explain the policies and processes so others are better informed.

 

I understand and fully accept the wish to keep the genetic and health integrity and pureness of a breed but lets face it, I was watching a documentary some time ago about how selective breeding of a number of KC recognised breeds has lead to some major health and physical defects so you then question the health aspect of breeders claims.

 

I hope this does not turn into a destructive debate, but that it opens constructive dialogue where people can be educated should they wish to be.

 

Regards Bill

[hightail]

If someone is a member and breeder with the KC maybe you can explain the policies and processes so others are better informed.

 

 

I can explain it for cats (the Govening Council of the Cat Fancy), I'm not as familiar with the KC structure though it won't be a million miles out.

 

 

The GCCF is not some sort of statutory body, it is the sum of its members who choose to belong to member clubs. These are mainly breeders but anyone can join. There will be a club for each breed, sometimes several, and there are also area clubs eg the Kent Cat Club or the like. Each club votes in a committee each year at an AGM. At this level club decisions are made and it can set whatever rules it likes for club members. Each committee provides one delegate to go to council meetings so every club has a vote for decisions which affect cat breeding in general. Any club can ask for something to be put on the agenda for council and it will be discussed and voted on. If passed then it's acted on. Registration bodies are perfectly aware they have no legal power to stop an owner allowing their animal to have a litter but neither does an owner have any right to demand the services of that body if they choose not to join and abide by its rules.

 

 

There are also Breed Advisory Committees made up of committee members for that breed. If there is only one club for a breed then all BAC members will be from that one committee. If there is more than one (some breeds have quite a few) then the BAC will be made up of delegates from each of them. This committee will decide on general breed policy and monitor the progress of probationer judges, comment on their reports from shows and generally guide them to full judge status. It really is about as exciting as pointing out spelling mistakes and adjusting the general tone of show reports

 

 

Your breeder hasn't said you can't breed from your dog. They've said you and your neighbour/friend/cousin can't mate your dogs because you fancy some pups and register them with the KC as pedigree animals from her line without consulting her first. She would then guide you through the process of getting your dog hip scored along with any other necessary testing (it varies by breed). She has the knowledge to verify the pedigree and hip score of your chosen bitch. She knows how to calculate the coefficient of inbreeding and work out if the result falls within guidelines. Without all of this you could well breed a litter of pups which the KC wouldn't register anyway because you didn't know there were all these hoops to jump through. There's every chance you went to this breeder exactly because they are prepared to jump through all those hoops, to health test, to comply with standards. All they are asking if you want to breed your dog using their name is that those standards can be maintained, that next time somebody makes a TV programme about bad breeders it isn't her name one generation back on a pedigree certificate.

[billathome65]

 

 

Your breeder hasn't said you can't breed from your dog. They've said you and your neighbour/friend/cousin can't mate your dogs because you fancy some pups and register them with the KC as pedigree animals from her line without consulting her first. She would then guide you through the process of getting your dog hip scored along with any other necessary testing (it varies by breed). She has the knowledge to verify the pedigree and hip score of your chosen bitch. She knows how to calculate the coefficient of inbreeding and work out if the result falls within guidelines. Without all of this you could well breed a litter of pups which the KC wouldn't register anyway because you didn't know there were all these hoops to jump through. There's every chance you went to this breeder exactly because they are prepared to jump through all those hoops, to health test, to comply with standards. All they are asking if you want to breed your dog using their name is that those standards can be maintained, that next time somebody makes a TV programme about bad breeders it isn't her name one generation back on a pedigree certificate.

Thanks for all the information it made interesting reading. I have just highlighted this as it is relevant.

 

As stated in the title the breeder states I ( holistically ) anyone who bought the last litter cannot breed and KC the pups not that the dog cannot be bread I totally accept the terms and have no intention of moving from that directive They actually stated that if I wished to put him to stud then to get back to them so they where very supportive. Yes they have the knowledge and are best placed to advise. So I would assume that if someone wished to breed a bitch the original breeder is the one who chooses the stud not the perspective bitch owner after say in the case of a GSD the hip score is good and both dogs have shown very good temperament?

 

I have owned GSD in the past, never breed them I will say. So was happy to pay top end for my boy and spent the best part of 14 hours checking the temperament between my boy and another potential pet. I wanted to see how he reacted to children, noise, other dogs what he was like at feeding time how he coped with child attention, if he was independent his own boss or was happy to take a submissive pack attitude. I then chose my lad.

 

Any others have views on this subject? I know it's move technically from advice to general discussion, but feel the thread still has legs.

 

Bill

[hightail]

So I would assume that if someone wished to breed a bitch the original breeder is the one who chooses the stud not the perspective bitch

 

Probably but I'd like to put it more in terms that the original breeder would 'advise'. In reality, with both dogs and cats, stud owners are most likely to have novice breeders introduced to them by either the original breeder or other mutual friends. If I didn't know someone who approached me to use my boy the first thing I'd do is check the breed club lists to see if they were a member. It is the breed clubs that disseminate new information, newly available DNA tests new regulations etc. and I'd want anyone using my boy to at least be interested in such things. I'd be very wary of a complete stranger contacting me out of the blue and claiming they had a pedigree girl registered for breeding.

 

 

I know it must seem like a closed world and people who don't breed will ascribe all sorts of motives to breeders who seem to have protectionist policies. It's a lose/lose situation for us in a way. If we attempt to ensure standards are kept high we are seen as being unreasonably restrictive. If we didn't we'd rightly be seen as irresponsible puppy/kitten farmers.

[billathome65]

That's a fair point but as you say in some ways the policies can be seen as restrictive and protectionist and the more cynical may say protection of breeding profits I know some pedigree dogs not KC registered go for around £250 in the case of GSD the lower end for KC reg GSD can be £350 - £400 I did my homework on my breeder who actually lives 5 minuets away in the car and went for the higher end of £750 based on his parents credentials I'm happy at that.

 

Bill

[hightail]

I know some pedigree dogs not KC registered go for around £250 in the case of GSD the lower end for KC reg GSD can be £350 - £400

 

So let's look at the potential difference. Let's say £150 less for a non registered pup though I do think that's a minimum. How many is average for a litter of GSDs? I don't know so let's say six, making a difference of £900 per litter. I reckon that barely covers the required health testing and other expenses a non breeder wouldn't bother with. However, buy a registered pup and breed it to any other dog without those expenses and it could look an attractive idea to someone just looking to make some money. It will be easy enough to produce pedigree certificates for those pups because the parents were bought from legitimate breeders. Those breeders would even have produced copies of hip scores if asked so these can be produced for unwary buyers who will believe they are valid for the parents of the pups if that's what they're told. A bit of scanning and editing will produce paperwork which looks official to most pet buyers anyway and you would be amazed at how many don't check what should be supplied and what it should look like.

 

 

Without the check of breeding restrictions and on registrations this is how nice people will be parted from their hard earned cash with no idea of the differences between a good breeder and someone just out to make some cash. There will be no comeback because the 'breeder' doesn't belong to any organisation. There's next to no consumer protection because it's a private sale. The only part of SoGA which applies to private sales is misrepresentation - you can't say those pups are KC registered pedigrees if they aren't. When something goes wrong for a puppy buyer it's often those very restrictions you found so annoying which will allow action to be taken by Trading Standards.

[caro]

While I don't disagree that there will be unscrupulous people looking to make money, to charge top dollar for a dog with restrictions for breeding seems a bit naughty to me. I suspect a GSD would have rather more than 6 pups.

 

Things may have improved in recent years, but when my mother bred dogs, there was quite a bit of snobbery and unpleasantness in the dog world, especially in the show ring. Obviously pups from the best dogs attracted the best prices so there's a lot at stake.

 

On a small scale, breeding dogs is not as lucrative as you may think, especially with smaller breeds that have smaller litters. By the time stud fees are paid, vets bills, KC registration, feeding pups etc, there's not much profit. A good stud dog can make a fortune though, but may not make the best pets, so Mr Snip is a good idea.

[hightail]

A good stud dog can make a fortune though,

 

How much? As I've said I'm more involved with cats than dogs and I'd be really pushing it to break even over the course of a year but I do understand cats aren't dogs What sort of annual net profit would the owner of a good stud dog expect to make?

[caro]

I don't honestly know that much detail, but it's quite common for a stud fee to be the price of a puppy. Indeed some owners will accept pick of litter as stud fee. I believe they can even command 4 figure sums. Of course with a dog it can perform as often as people are willing to pay the fee.

 

To be fair, owners may have spent years breeding the perfect specimen, travelling to shows, paying for accommodation etc, with prizes little more than a rosette and some dog food.

[ploddertom]

This leaflet help explain a bit more. Normal practice is for the Breeder to endorse the the Registration and the only way it can be liftedd is for the person who made the endorsement to remove it. Some breeders will also include stipulation in any "contract" they may ask you to agree to.

[hightail]

While I don't disagree that there will be unscrupulous people looking to make money, to charge top dollar for a dog with restrictions for breeding seems a bit naughty to me.

Some breeders charge more for a dog without restrictions ie when the buyer has been honest from the start about their intention. That's 'top dollar' and you'll be paying it for the breeder to help you pick out the best possible pup from the litter in terms of the breed standard. There's every chance the pet buyers will be delayed from choosing/booking their pup until the latest possible moment to give you both the best chance of seeing how the pups develop and to make the best choice.

[ploddertom]

I ran a Breed Rescue with my o/h for more years than I care to think about and one of the main reasons we had so many dogs coming through Rescue was some of the indiscriminate breeding that went on. Eventuall we managed to persuade a few of the more high profile breeders to endorse their Registrations, whilst it was not an instant fix 5 years later it did have an effect in that very few of any of their bloodlines came through the Rescue. Although having been "retired" from this for about 10 years now I do know the practice still carries on, Of course this is just a drop in the ocean as it was just a few of a single breed.

[caro]

My mum bought 2 bitches that had been bred from repeatedly in awful conditions. They were in a dreadful state and had never lived anywhere but filthy kennels. The breeder was happy for them to go as they were no longer producing decent litters, so I certainly agree that regulation is a good thing.

 

As an aside, I wonder if stricter regulation is behind the roaring trade in cross-breeds which can cost as much as a pedigree.

[ploddertom]

Yes when you work at the sharp end you certainly get to see some sad sights. Fortunately we had a good rapprt with our local RSPCA Inspectors and if we rang they knew it was important. many times it was more ignorance than neglect or abuse and often a good telling off served the necessary purpose. Only the worst went to Court.

 

Croos breed popularity is becaoming more the norm these days as Labradoodles & Cockapoos are the in thing to have and become a status symbol or must have accesory. God forbid it gets like it does in parts of Spain where they are paraded in prams along the promenades in tourist resorts. They have a scheme in Germany for some breeds where you have to have permission to put dog & bitch together and that has cut a lot of indiscriminate breeding out as there is no market for "unauthorised" litters. At the end of the day the Kennel Club have the Good Breeder Scheme or whatever it is called where a list of accredited breeders is available - in my view and from what I have seen the lists contain some of the biggest puppy farmers around who have joined - for a fee - to get respectability. I won't touch upon the subject of Eire where a lot of dogs originate without due care for hereditary problems.

[hightail]

They have a scheme in Germany for some breeds where you have to have permission to put dog & bitch together and that has cut a lot of indiscriminate breeding out as there is no market for "unauthorised" litters.

I wish we could have some sort of sensible scheme here - for both dogs and cats. The problem is that any authority which could really make a difference will only ever see it as a way of generating cash rather than truly wishing to deal with a problem. Something as simple as requiring anyone selling puppies and kittens to get a certificate of health from their vet would stop the unscrupulous from just producing litters for money in a back room and would definitely hurt the dreadful import trade in very young puppies.

[billathome65]

Thanks for all the replies it shows that this is an area for debate.

 

To pay top dollar for a pup with restrictions is naughty was one comment and that's an area I think is a good point because if you pay top dollar you will want to ensure good breeding and not indiscriminate breeding in my opinion However, at £750 whilst he was at the higher end he still falls short of the £1260.00 I saw from one breeder GSD can have as many as 12 pups so at the higher end prices £650 and over it is a very lucrative area so it is in the best interest of any breeder to vet other matches. We have a cross mastiff boxer bitch rescue dog which cost my daughter over £100 from the dogs home she was in a state as a pup and to see her now in comparison she is a totally different dog and the first job when she was old enough was the snip. We spend more money out on dog food each month than we do on the house shopping LOL but hey as a responsible owner what can you do?

 

Totally agree with unscrupulous breeders and whilst this may cause controversy in some the trend of breeding GSD with sloping backs which walk on their hocks as you are seeing more in the US is a real cause for concern to me as the KC in the US have allowed this breeding practice to flourish by accepting the breed.

 

If breeders truly want better health, longevity and gene pools why are the KC allowing this abuse of breeding?

 

Again to me it seems like breeders and cold hard cash is talking what are others thoughts?

[caro]

It's hard to strike a balance. On the one hand it's important to ensure healthy dogs are bred but by stopping genuine pet owners who may, for example, want to breed a litter from their much loved pet so that they can have another for themselves, and those who are plain irresponsible. Keeping it in the club ensures prices can be kept high.

 

When we got married our first dog was one that mum had bred and it was very special to see him born, and even when he died, to know he was much loved his whole life.

[hightail]

Again to me it seems like breeders and cold hard cash is talking what are others thoughts?

Well I guess it's what you mean by a breeder. If you mean anyone who chooses to allow their dog or cat to have a litter then you are delving into a world I have nothing to do with. If you mean someone who breeds because they have a passion for the breed, years of experience and a pitiful bank balance to match that passion then for me it is a different story.

 

 

If you want an example of what happens when everyone and anyone 'breeds' without restrictions go to any rescue or rehoming centre and look at all the Staffies. It's truly heartbreaking how such a lovely breed has been abused.