Steve

Doubt we can blame that either the stats show a massive drop in GSD numbers since 86 Its a consistent drop and no one period stands out as being "it"

Its tempting to say the limited register may have impacted a fair bit over time - except that before the limited register breeders only had to register dogs that were going to be used for breeding or showing - I've never sold a puppy without papers and my first litter was in 78 - so all of my pups pre limited register went out being able to be used for breeding registered dogs. But most breeders didnt issue papers they didnt need to so the numbers have dropped even more than the stats show because number pre limited register never really showed how many were being bred. I agree with Anne that many things have impacted but I dont think banning docking should be held as the main reason.

O.K. except that from my perspective there hasn't been a period where Corgis were less popular - my Mum bred them for over 50 years and I bred them for a decade - in my opinion the breeding of them has been manipulated and hugely limited with the breeders being very good at ensuring few were able to be used for breeding .There has always been a huge demand for them and there still is. One puppy farm has them in Victoria and they are all spoken for before they hit the ground. Its not that people dont want them it is that we cant get them.

there is only 50 more standard poodles registered with the ANKC Australia wide now than there was 20 years ago Minis 700 less and Toys the same give or take 10 so if you are seeing more poodles its not because more are being bred by registered breeders.

Except in 1999 only 15 breeds had their registrations increased and they only increased by a handful .If this really were about what is popular then I would expect to see major fluctuations with some breed numbers going up a lot through some periods and and other's going down in a trend that didnt fit other breeds. If it were true that less Corgis are bred because there is less demand and they are less popular then it should be easier for someone who wants one to get one and there are thousands of people who want a registered one including me who cant get one.

Very little to do with docking in my opinion here n Australia. No Docking came in around 2004 and the numbers had started dropping way before then. If we are going to look at what impacted a drop in numbers bred might be an idea to work out what happened in 1998/99 because thats when most working dog breeds dropped - and radically dropped in That year [99] GSD numbers dropped by almost 2000. Its impacted by breeders who have limited the gene pool "protecting their bloodline" - not enough put out for breeding - too many on limited register and laws and regs which don't give a crap about what is best for the species or best practice which further limit how many can be bred etc. In 2012 only 5 working dog breeds out of 34 had more puppies registered than Corgis - nothing to do with docking - If thats not a screaming red light about all breeds here then I don't know what is.

I was shopping for a new Maremma boy and applied to an ad on dogz and was told that the rest of the litter had gone to working homes and owners did not require papers and the state org would not register a part litter or one pup for a litter so none would have papers.

Could be loads of things to explain it. I know a new breeder who used a registered stud dog to cover her bitch- the SDO refused to sign papers at the time even though they observed the mating and took full payment for it .When the puppies were born SDO refused at first to sign papers unless they all went on limited register - that almost went ahead until they realised that the breeder could upgrade later so because they said the pups were not good enough to have their prefix listed as stud dog they would not sign stud certificate. If the breeder wanted compensation she had to go through consumer tribunals and then all she would get is her stud money back anyway. All puppies were sold without papers. This one sounds suss but Ive learned to hold off until all the facts are known before being too judgemental - working dogs have special considerations as well.

- In this case your assumption would be correct. Cage drying can be done in several ways, and for a couple of reasons. The very sad thing is that it can be an excellent method of assisting drying for very elderly or extremely nervous dogs when hand drying them is stressful, and that does not mean blasting them with a constant stream of hot air up close for a long period or at temperatures that are dangerous and leaving them there to cook. If a dog is placed in an open cage and has air flow around it is possible to direct warm or room temp air around the dog whilst it is under the watchful eye of a responsible Groomer and minimise the time needed for table drying a stressed or elderly animal. Whilst good Groomers have various techniques for minimising the stress and easing animals through the grooming process there will always be a few animals do not cope well on the table, and we sometimes have to come up with ways of working around the animal Like the awful Buddy tragedy this was the result of human negligence. These incidents were not because cage drying or table restraints were used, they were due to human negligence and apparent contempt for the welfare of animals in their care. Agree ...and until the industry is properly licensed and standard training practices and staff qualifications are legislated it will keep happening. Are there any current accredited courses groomers can undertake? Its not just courses - its third party accountability that is required.

So do most breeds in development and thats usually what stops them ever really getting to where they could get if they had a third party registry - because there is a greater risk where the people can branch off and do it THEIR way - its why you see three registries for the Aussie Bulldog and several for the Australian Labradooodle. Think about it - knowing the breed politics of all breeds - not just those in development if the registry wasnt third party with set rules for who can and cant decide about changing the standard and what needs to be done for registration purposes etc same could happen even for those which have long been established. But they create their own registries usually because the ANKC and the like won't even consider accepting them. Yes they need to keep records to be able to know what they are breeding with etc and they have to have their own registries because if they ever want recognition thats part of the criteria - so for 15 years they are at high risk of personalities and differing opinions seeing some move off and splinter groups forming. And this has happened with Aussie Bulldogs. It was quite a while ago so I don't know the ins and outs of it but basically the founding person (Pip Nobes) and another founding member had different ideas on where the breed should be going and so he split off to start another group. Although TBH when you're still heavily using another breed (BB) and the biggest selling point is how much percentage of that breed the dogs have in them, why not just get that breed to begin with? One of the splits for the Aust Cobberdogs was that some wanted to bring in a border Collie infusion - the founders were pretty upset about this as they had worked hard to have no shedding genes left and they felt introducing the possibility of a herding gene was horrific - once they get out voted etc its a done deal so they either continue on watching what they had envisioned for the breed trashed [ in their opinion] or leave and start again with another registry. Another split was about the level of testing and of course recently with the name change. With a third party registry they cant just change the rules mid stream and there is a procedure which cant be manipulated by individuals to protect the whole thing and give them a better chance of succeeding.

So do most breeds in development and thats usually what stops them ever really getting to where they could get if they had a third party registry - because there is a greater risk where the people can branch off and do it THEIR way - its why you see three registries for the Aussie Bulldog and several for the Australian Labradooodle. Think about it - knowing the breed politics of all breeds - not just those in development if the registry wasnt third party with set rules for who can and cant decide about changing the standard and what needs to be done for registration purposes etc same could happen even for those which have long been established. But they create their own registries usually because the ANKC and the like won't even consider accepting them. Yes they need to keep records to be able to know what they are breeding with etc and they have to have their own registries because if they ever want recognition thats part of the criteria - so for 15 years they are at high risk of personalities and differing opinions seeing some move off and splinter groups forming.

I guess it would be the one that gets to the recognition finish line first! With the ANKC that's about right and because it has to withstand 15 years of being the parent club not many can last the distance. Once they are accepted the ANKC wont take any notice of splinter groups. The MDBA comes in much sooner than this with the foundation registry but it's still about who applies for the foundation registry first after they fit the parent club criteria. Once they have been accepted for the foundation registry no splinter groups are able to be involved and they only work with the parent club. It is the parent club which is able to announce that if people want to be sure they have a purebred that unless they purchase dogs with the registry issued papers they are not bona fide pure breds.

So do most breeds in development and thats usually what stops them ever really getting to where they could get if they had a third party registry - because there is a greater risk where the people can branch off and do it THEIR way - its why you see three registries for the Aussie Bulldog and several for the Australian Labradooodle. Think about it - knowing the breed politics of all breeds - not just those in development if the registry wasnt third party with set rules for who can and cant decide about changing the standard and what needs to be done for registration purposes etc same could happen even for those which have long been established.

The only thing an ANKC recognised breed or dog of the breed which is ANKC registered has is that it is recognised by one group - the ANKC . To presume that this is the only group that is able to recognise a breed or register the ancestry of a dog is due to the fact that you are are of the belief that if its not recognised by this group it isn't counted. For example in the states the AKC do not recognise the Maremma as a recognise breed - to assume that maremma in the states are not recognised as a breed by lots of other groups and lots of other people would be ridiculous. Just because you and some others have certain criteria to recognise something as a purebred - whether it is recognised as a breed and registered on THEIR registry - only means it fits your criteria and its how YOU recognise it as a purebred. Lots of others especially those who belong to that group or who register dogs with them or who own dogs which are registered with them agree with you doesn't make it a done deal that this is how everyone should think. Well, Steve, I have no issue with the points you raise- you have your opinion, to which you're absolutely entitled, and I have mine. May I just make this point though- the dogzonline forum rules state (and I quote) that 'This site was created for pure bred dog discussion (ANKC recognised breeds) The primary purpose of this forum is to promote and discuss pure bred dogs (as recognised by the ANKC) so we ask you respect our aim when visiting here.' I think that my view, when viewed in the context of this forum, has some merit. I didnt state what my opinion was - simply that fact of life is that some people don't see things the same way that those who are only focused on the ANKC see things. Like it or not there are other registries and even some breeds which are adamant they never want ANKC recognition. What I think about that doesn't count.

Yep been around for ever too.

Mini Foxy The Australian Cobberdog - and the reason we made them change their name was because keeping it as the Australian Labradoodle confused the public as first cross lab x poodles are still called this and those who breed them never want to do multi generations and never want to be involved in breed development - it legitimises cross breeding. Same with the Australasian Bosdog it immediately recognises it as a breed in development and not just a bunch of people doing first crosses and cashing in on "hybrids" it takes a while for the name changes to take and it's why there is usually a 3 year transition period as it comes around to being used to describe the breed.

well its not really a cat in the hat thing - when a stud book is open in any registry at any time a dog without that lineage is able to be entered into the gene pool and usually after 4 or 5 generations it is declared to be a purebred . The ANKC require 5 generations from a cross when considering recognising a breed ANKC Ltd to assess whether the breed is considered sufficiently viable from the above information, taking into account that: 10.2.4.1 Minimum Number of dogs registered be 500 That at the time of application there must be 500 dogs of the breed alive and all of the 500 dogs must be entire (none of them to be neutered). (10/02) 10.2.4.2 Minimum time the breed has been in existence be 15 years. That there has been a parent club (usually an Incorporated Body) covering the whole of Australia that has acted as the Stud Book Register for the breed for a minimum period of fifteen [15] years. Not that someone has been breeding the breed for fifteen [15] years. (10/02) 10.2.4.3 Minimum time the breed has been in existence be 15 years. This means that only those dogs with a 5-generation pedigree will be eligible for acceptance on to ANKC Ltd register at the time, if and when, the breed is adopted as an official ANKC Ltd Breed. The 5-generation pedigree does not apply to the 500 dogs on the Register. (10/02) Right now in the United Kingdom Kennel Club all stud books are open and anyone can enter a dog that fits certain criteria and has no registered pedigree after 4 generations its considered full register and able to be shown or bred with - or exported to Australai as a purebred. Pedigrees show how many generations past a dog from outside the 4 or 5 generations"purebred" - note above that even though only 5 generation dogs will be on the ANKC register when the breed is approved that there may in fact only be one that's 5 generation and 500 1,2,3, or 4 generation past an infusion for the breed to be recognised.

The only thing an ANKC recognised breed or dog of the breed which is ANKC registered has is that it is recognised by one group - the ANKC . To presume that this is the only group that is able to recognise a breed or register the ancestry of a dog is due to the fact that you are are of the belief that if its not recognised by this group it isn't counted. For example in the states the AKC do not recognise the Maremma as a recognise breed - to assume that maremma in the states are not recognised as a breed by lots of other groups and lots of other people would be ridiculous. Just because you and some others have certain criteria to recognise something as a purebred - whether it is recognised as a breed and registered on THEIR registry - only means it fits your criteria and its how YOU recognise it as a purebred. Lots of others especially those who belong to that group or who register dogs with them or who own dogs which are registered with them agree with you doesn't make it a done deal that this is how everyone should think.

One of the biggest problems for any purebreed in development is that the politics is lethal. Many that start never get to where they are going because they splinter off and go in different ways. This would probably be the case with any breed if it was possible for them to do it. The ANKC dont get involved until it all sorted and the breed has finished its journey and fits the criteria. The MDBA in this country offers the ability for the developing breeds to use us as a third party arms length foundation registry which cant be affected by politics in order to keep accurate records of the pedigrees and lineage.This makes it easier and much less risky for those working toward breed development until they reach the criteria required for ANKC recognition if that's the goal they are after. Our criteria for MDBA breed recognition for entry into our full stud registry is a little more relaxed than the ANKC's but the procedure is the same though there is less emphasis on the show ring and we are not as eager to have closed stud books.

This doesn't stop puppy farms anyway it just tells them what they have to do to comply. The more you regulate the more larger commercial breeder's turn up - too bad they havent worked that out yet. They had enough already if they just policed it.

Either way I cant trust her out in the paddock - no good having a guardian dog that takes off and leaves her charges to face a perceived threat on their own so she now has a small yarded area inside the house yard with a couple of her sheep which has a big igloo /cave type thing for her to hide in if she gets shaky before I see it coming. Not sure its a jealously issue but thats handled because they cant get to each other now and because they now see each other all the time because one is in a yard within a yard hopefully it will lessen. Because one has been in the paddock since she was 6 weeks old and the other in the house yard they have never met so when one jumps the fence and arrives in the house yard trying to get inside the house the other is defending me and the house. So they are both guarding me against each other - they aren't yelling at each other as much now and they are each seeing me loving the other so it will get better I just cant rush it . If the paddock dog had been introduced to her in the yard before she just decided to jump the fence and tear around like an idiot trying to push past everything and everyone to get inside the house it would have been easier /quicker but the buggers have memories like elephants and it takes a bit of work when they have decided they hate each other.

but you see this is really the whole issue - how is it that a breeder who sells a pup to a pet shop doesn't have this kind of thing to be concerned about and nor does a pet shop - the only logical reason a person who actually sells the dog they bred could be held more liable is if they made extra warranties and implied that the dog wont ever get sick or suffer from any genetic disease. If we simply placed guarantees on our pups as we are made to do via mandatory codes in NSW and Victoria then this should be all thats required as long as we dont make any promises to the contrary.

If we all stop telling people they can be sure our dogs will never get genetic diseases and be honest then If you explain to the Purchaser that any living creature can become sick from something that may have a genetic component no matter how hard we try to prevent it saying its something you cant guarantee in writing prior to the sale then they will be the ones carrying the risk because they are aware of the risks prior to sale and still agree to purchase knowing there is no guarantee for this. If all genetic diseases were treated in the same way then Breeders would have some protection from the financial consequences of selling dogs that are not of "merchantable quality" or fit for the purpose they were sold far into the future. The only reason a breeder has to be more accountable far into the future for the dogs they breed than a pet shop is because they tell buyers that they will guarantee this and the reality is they cant. All we CAN do is do everything we know to reduce the risks and tell the truth when we sell our pups - that there is no guarantee that the dog will not develop some condition which may have a genetic component throughout its lifetime,that the pup is fit and healthy with no signs of disease at time of sale and if something happens related to point of sale for a limited period refunds and expenses will be covered as they should be and have to be according to law. Consumer law cant make you guarantee something you are not able to guarantee as long as you are up front about the fact that you cant guarantee it. The concept that someone can refuse a refund, refuse to have vet work carried out by a breeder approved repairer or send it home to the breeder for it to be repaired by the breeder's repairer and instead clock up massive bills expecting the breeder to pay months or years down the track especially when there are potentially other things which may have caused the problem is ridiculous but if we say or imply we will guarantee a pup against genetic disorders for life we ask for it.Unless we put in writing that we are not guaranteeing such things prior to sale they can say we said so or implied it because we are registered breeders and that complicates it more. There is so much peer pressure and outside push for breeders to make these guarantees to be seen to be a good breeder that we have missed the point .When something like this happens the owner is devastated and if a breeder guarantees it they never even contemplate the risk or what they may need to do to reduce the risk because why would a breeder guarantee it if there was any doubt that the dog would not remain healthy and never develop a disease? They buy the pup with the expectation that these are things they will never see or ever have to think about and its not just a money issue. Why is this happening? Its not just because people are more aware and like to sue etc it's also because breeders are making bigger and more unexplained claims than they used to. By all means tell them why you think the dog wont develop a problem and what you have done to prevent them, guarantee them for 14 days for refunds and expenses and advise them to get insurance because state clearly what comes next is out of your hands and your control. Don't pay out money until you are sure it is something you need to be responsible for and pay for - rely on what your vet tells you after they have seen the reports. If your vet says it is genetic and you have guaranteed there will be no genetic issues or if you havent explained you cant prior to sale in writing - you're it - pay up. In the case of the OP something you did or did not do made these puppy buyers believe that if their dog developed this condition that you would compensate them because they have asked you to cover it - if you had been clear in writing prior to sale that there was no guarantee on this they would have known this and it wouldnt be an issue - so pay the refund and dont demand return of the pup for them to get it. Next time you breed a litter provide a written contract to say that you cannot guarantee such things after an X period of time and have them sign that they have read this.