Guest Anonymous Posted October 3, 2004 Posted October 3, 2004 We all know the stance on the AKC. What about the CKC? SCBCA? APRI? Do any of you use them? I currently use the AKC and have researched the others a little. The CKC seems too lenient, the APRI seems even more lenient, the SCBCA seems more 'up to date'. Are there any other MAJOR differences in these clubs? Quote
imported_Matty Posted October 4, 2004 Posted October 4, 2004 CKC is too lenient??? you are talking about the Canadian kennel club are you not? if so, they are much more strict than the AKC Quote
ObedienceGrrl Posted October 4, 2004 Posted October 4, 2004 SCBCA....isn't that the one that accepts all the Doodles and Poos (please don't get me started.....)? Not just the Labradoodles but also the Shepadoodles....Cockapoos....and all the like?? :onfire: Quote
Guest Anonymous Posted October 6, 2004 Posted October 6, 2004 No, I meant the Contentintal Kennel CLub......you can register a dog with them if you submit two pictures of it and 'say' it's a pure bred. To me, that is a joke. There is no way of knowing if you are registering a pure breed or not. Yes, the SCBCA provides pedigree on some of the poo and doodle mixes, but they are not classified as a breed. I particularly don't mind this since this is the very way we got our pure breds of today. At some point, someone had to start keeping a pedigree on them before they were considered a pure breed dog. The SCBCA is VERY strict on letting you register a cross though. Either way, I was just wondering who all used what clubs and why? No need to ruffle any feathers or get defensive - it's a simple question. Quote
Lucky Chaos Posted October 6, 2004 Posted October 6, 2004 StarliteSetters napisał(a):No, I meant the Contentintal Kennel CLub......you can register a dog with them if you submit two pictures of it and 'say' it's a pure bred. To me, that is a joke. There is no way of knowing if you are registering a pure breed or not. Yes, the SCBCA provides pedigree on some of the poo and doodle mixes, but they are not classified as a breed. I particularly don't mind this since this is the very way we got our pure breds of today. At some point, someone had to start keeping a pedigree on them before they were considered a pure breed dog. The SCBCA is VERY strict on letting you register a cross though. Either way, I was just wondering who all used what clubs and why? No need to ruffle any feathers or get defensive - it's a simple question. The Continental Kennel Club also registers "designer dogs" I believe. They really don't care if a dog is purebred or not. IMO any kennel club that registers mixed breeds is only for BYB's and irrisponsible breeders. I guess that includes the SCBCA, even though I've never heard of it. Quote
BuddysMom Posted October 6, 2004 Posted October 6, 2004 Yes, the SCBCA provides pedigree on some of the poo and doodle mixes, but they are not classified as a breed. I particularly don't mind this since this is the very way we got our pure breds of today. I think the way we got our breeds of today were usually through decades or even centuries of trait enhancement, almost always for a working purpose, not by random crossing for our own amusement and money making. Not trying to be snarkey, just saying as the SCBCA gives credibility to these mixes they must not be very good. Quote
__crazy_canine__ Posted October 6, 2004 Posted October 6, 2004 Personally, I dont like any of the kennel clubs. AKC has only one good thing about it and that is theyre careful to accept new breeds (and by new I dont mean newly created I just mean new to the club) It makes me sick that these places are actually accepting dogs from BYBs and mills and just poorly bred (although I think that would fit into BYB-bred dogs) :roll: :cry: :evil: Quote
imported_Kat Posted October 6, 2004 Posted October 6, 2004 I agree that a cross-breed should be registered with a KC on a working list and that is the case in the UK where there are several different registers for obedience/agility/working trials and the breed registrar is different. Quote
Guest Anonymous Posted October 6, 2004 Posted October 6, 2004 ~~~I think the way we got our breeds of today were usually through decades or even centuries of trait enhancement, almost always for a working purpose, not by random crossing for our own amusement and money making. ~~~ Oh....absolutely.......but they still had to have a pedigree furnished by someone. The SCBCA does not register the BYB's or puppy mills. They only register crosses who are proven to be bred to try and establish a breed - in essence, they are only providing pedigree information to those responsible enough to use it. I think people should do their homework on this registry before making any assumptions. Quote
BuddysMom Posted October 6, 2004 Posted October 6, 2004 They could be very responsible but if one is against the establishment of these new doodle and poo breeds, period, then that precludes not wanting to support those who legitimize them. Quote
imported_Debbie Posted October 6, 2004 Posted October 6, 2004 I think desertlady's reply says it all !! I totally agree. :wink: Quote
TDG Posted October 7, 2004 Posted October 7, 2004 i like the UKC because they aren't as elitist as the AKC when it comes to allowing spayed/neutered mixed breeds to compete in many different activities, from obedience to agility and in their accepted breeds they focus more on a capable working dog that meets the breed standard and not just looks. the AKC is too much about looks and not enough about preserving the integrity of the breeds it recognizes. Quote
Rowie-the-Pooh Posted October 7, 2004 Posted October 7, 2004 TDG napisał(a): the AKC is too much about looks and not enough about preserving the integrity of the breeds it recognizes. Although I don't have any clubs where I live (except the National Dog Club and the GSD Club which aren't official anyway) and don't know that much about clubs, I agree about the whole AKC thing. A show line and working line could look as different as two different breeds, its ridiculous! A dog could look amazing but have terrible traits, too. Quote
courtnek Posted October 8, 2004 Posted October 8, 2004 [quote name='Rowie-the-Pooh'][quote name='TDG'] the AKC is too much about looks and not enough about preserving the integrity of the breeds it recognizes. Although I don't have any clubs where I live (except the National Dog Club and the GSD Club which aren't official anyway) and don't know that much about clubs, I agree about the whole AKC thing. A show line and working line could look as different as two different breeds, its ridiculous! A dog could look amazing but have terrible traits, too. I agree with this 100%. My foxhound is an excellent example. she's a working dog, did field trials for 6 years. her picture is in my sig. She looks nothing like a Show foxhound. She stil has her dewclaws, she can outrun any other dog I know (possibly excepting a Greyhound) and her nose is phenomenal. I dont think the average Show Foxhound could track a fox to save its life. I am one of those people that believes that the dog, in order to win a show, must be at LEAST marginally able to do what it was bred for. this is a Show English Foxhound: compare it to my sig. To me, it looks like a different dog entirely. Quote
__crazy_canine__ Posted October 8, 2004 Posted October 8, 2004 TDG napisał(a):the AKC is too much about looks and not enough about preserving the integrity of the breeds it recognizes. I mean I know now its not as important for a dog to "work" but is it really the same breed without its ability to? AKC is losing that trait and it makes me angry... Looks should NOT create a champion unless the looks go along with its working ability like Courtnek said. Quote
imported_nea Posted October 8, 2004 Posted October 8, 2004 [quote name='DivineOblivion19'] I agree! Those silly AKC people won't even let my deaf dog compete in agility! :x But she can in UKC! :D :o Why won't they let her compete?? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.