Erny

For a whole year, I presume?

My dog gets to win many many more times than I do.

This is what I don't understand. Here comes along an organisation that seeks to fill the voids that exists within another organisation (who is not dumb to what's going on; the grumblings; etc). Breeders have a choice. Refuse to join the second organisation and work with what they've got and what they've had for ....... how long? Ummmm ..... 60 years now? ... ok, that's a choice, although people have tried to communicate; have voiced their concerns; have voiced their opinions; etc. etc. And it is how far a long to being better? They can, if they wish, join another newer organisation. One which expresses its acknowledgement of problems that need addressing; that have needed addressing for a long long time but which (not for the want of nudging/trying) aren't being addressed satisfactorily and without detriment to the very breeders that are the 'other' organisation's members (this is as I understand things). It will cost a fee. Certainly. I'd even expect that. But if that organisation was no threat to what I did as a breeder (if I was one) and indeed if that organisation could provide me with some benefit, be that by way of support/attestation to what I do and/or by support in working for better laws (or helping prevent or at least working against laws that are degenerative and in opposition to my very [ethical] aims and goals), then I can't see what the problem would be. I would happily pay that fee. Btw .... What fee are we talking about, for breeders, Steve?

Because the current one doesn't seem to be working very well, does it? Or do you think it is? I'm not sure how paying a private company so breeders can self-describe as 'master dog breeders' is a new wheel? After all, it's not an industry or accredited organisation. I thought it was about joining an organisation that is making the moves and noises to work to fix the things that so many have been expressing their concerns about for such a long time. Puppy farmers. Unethical breeders. Providing a clearer margin between them and the ethical breeders. Making it easier for the general public to see the trees even though the forest is in the way. Making it so that these same people will come seek puppies from those ethical breeders and not seek them from pet shops. An organisation which will work towards stopping crap laws coming in (laws that affect you very people .... laws that your other body of which you are a member of don't seem to be doing anything much about and earlier laws that your own other body of which you are a member (esp Victoria) were not only permitted to slip through but were not overtly announced and made clear to its members and when questioned (yes, I repeat myself) as to how it can let such a law/s slip through delivered an answer "sometimes you have to be nice to Government". So this latter "body" is the body that you like/prefer. You (and I'm speaking broadly here) now have an opportunity to do something about all of these things with an organisation that is publicly stating and showing its willingness to try to fix the wrongs that have been occurring over years and years (and this by an already WELL ESTABLISHED - not yelling - body, not one who has been up and coming and in the making) and now you're all knocking it on the head???

Well I can see one thing happening that was not happening before. A bunch of people coming together and saying "let's fix the old one". Ok. Fix it. If it is better than what the MDBA has to offer and works better, then what is everyone afraid of?

There is nothing wrong with aspiring to be elite, but buying a membership to say you are is what im against. Being an elite/accredited breeder should be like a life membership, a badge of honor awarded to you from those within - In this case the ANKC. This is achieved by your morals, ethics, knowledge and commitment not something you can buy. .... Are you saying membership to the ANKC is free? And/or are you saying that the "good/better" (so to speak) breeders are the ones who have been offered life membership by the ANKC? So only those whom the ANKC decides to award this honour to can share the "elitist/accreditation" category that you speak of? Or am I misunderstanding what you mean?

Because the current one doesn't seem to be working very well, does it? Or do you think it is?

Ummmm .... because I'm busy? Because I don't have any more spare time to involve myself in committees? Because I don't want this as my mainstream focus.

Exactly SwaY I have alot of ideas as to how that can be done, but I am just one person. Things sure has heck wouldnt change over night and it may take years but change is what is needed NOW! Change was needed 6 years ago. So now that MDBA is stepping up as a registry, all of a sudden things can change with the old one? Do we just continue to wait or do we give a new registry the chance to get up there and make a difference for us all?

That might potentially be how some BYB's first saw the ANKC way back when it was formed/forming ????? Maybe ??? MDBA is not being elitist. You do have the opportunity to join them.

Because when it comes to things such as laws and you ask the organisation behind the "current system" why it didn't step in to stop a ludicrous law from sliding throughand it answers "because you know you have to be nice to Government sometimes' .............. what hope has that "current system" got? Where would you start (and how) to clean up the current system to improve it and when would it get done, how long would it take?

And the other thing I'm really puzzled about ..... It's not that long ago and for quite some time there have been numerous threads started where many people have contributed by expressing their grave concerns, anger, disapproval, disenchantment, distrust and more ... about laws that have come in; why their State Body, ANKC or any other org come in to help them and do something either to stop it or about it. Now there's a chance for that "Body" to be formed and from the get go it is receiving a beating before it has even got off the ground, with the general consensus of feeling that I am getting from here and that seems to be that the current formula, whilst not perfect, will do and that people don't want any other? I'm a dog trainer, not a breeder, so perhaps I'm not seeing things from the angle many of the other of you are. BUT (not yelling) I am a dog purchaser and have had a small experience in that respect.

Steve : Whippets : .... The agenda being a mode by which to make obtaining a puppy from good breeders perhaps a little bit less than the Russian Roullete game that I felt it was when it was my turn to purchase a puppy? What's wrong with that? Bad luck for me, sure (well, sort of ..... happens I love my boy to bits and he's been a HUGE -not yelling- learning curve for me when it comes to learning about health and treatments, so I certainly acknowledge the silver lining side of things). But I'm not in that boat alone and when it comes the time that I might wish for another puppy, I don't want that experience again. Quite frankly, I found it quite stressful and would welcome with open arms an organisation that goes towards trying to screen breeders by asserting a criteria that forms a part of its membership contract.

Yes, but they don't have the food on tap 24/7. Many people are in favour of fasting their dogs once a week or so, to (a bit) more closely mimic the spasmodic eating behaviour they would exhibit if in the wild.

Asking others in the breed will soon turn up who is legit and not. If the same thing comes up over 5-10 different breeders, you know there is some truth to it. I asked. And I was deliberately not told until after I got my puppy. So that idea can still prove to be diddly squat help.

I think that's your interpretation but I don't think it is the correct one. The criteria for MDBA membership would be fairly clear and I think when people can see what the MDBA's criteria for membership is they will immediately know that each breeder member will have met that criteria. It is THEN (not yelling) up to the buyer to decide whether that additional criteria means anything to them or not.

Who gets to officially orchestrate and decide who is "bad" and who is not? I'm not keen on the "bag out the ones we don't like". It's not really the way I am, how I've been brought up nor what I believe in. I think I would hold more esteem for a person or organisation that sets up a criteria and supports those who meet that criteria by accepting membership and the way I see it that's what MDBA are doing.

+1 And that's the truth. And when I want a puppy, I don't want to have to spend time (that I often don't have) and effort as though I was undertaking some sort of degree to be able to sift through the good, the bad and the ugly. What I went through was enough, it shouldn't be like a full time job.

Because not all breeders support the MDBA & would prefer not to get involved when there name comes up. It seems a thing of late to be promoting the MDBA in DOL like some elite group when infact it isn't & i find it misleading .There are many wonderful ANKC breeders who do wonderful things & are just as ethical if not more yep flame suit on so shoot me Agree. I'm not getting this. Why so poisonous against the MDBA? It's an organisation that is standing in with the potential to succeed where others have failed. This is supposed to be about making it easier for puppy buyers to find the right breeders (and also about an organisation ready and willing to work for its members, especially in relation to Govt laws). It's been well discussed for a long time even just here on DOL how it's not always easy to find the right breeder via ANKC. So why are all the ANKC breeders up in arms? Is it ONLY (not yelling) because it brings about another registration fee? Is that it? Is that the major beef?

Annie99, imo, it all comes back to the buyer doing their research, because there is no easy way to sort out the good from the bad. Both sellers and buyers alike can cheat and lie, both sellers and buyers alike can get bitten on the bum by the "ethics" of the other person. It cuts both ways. There are pages on websites, advising puppy buyers what to look for in a good ethical breeder, there are pages listing bad buyers and what names/emails they are known to use. I was caught, many, many years ago by buying from a registered person who turned out to be a backyard breeder, no fancy internet sites back then. But it would be nice for novice puppy buyers to know that the breeders who are members of a certain org have been 'screened'. That's not something that the ANKC/State bodies do, so wouldn't the membership to MDBA give a better sense of confidence to the buyer and therefore an advantage to those breeders who are members?

I'm very much against free feeding in general. It isn't normal - it is not good for training and it isn't what their digestive systems are geared up for. They are hunters. They should be working for their food. But like Danois I've had to ignore this in my own dog's case, but the only reason for that is due to health issues. My boy is the same, Danois. Pulling the food away makes no difference and due to his digestive issues I think he finds it better for him to eat small amounts often (and as an aside, this fits the other of his profile which is now suggesting EPI, so I'm figuring he knows what he feels before I can). There are times where he has eaten so little I'm just glad when he decides he's hungry and eats. I don't always manage to pick those times when he feels like eating, so I do tend to leave food down for him. Although he's not so into dry food on its own and I do not leave the dry/wet mixed together as it tends to get attacked by the flies .... so leftovers get lifted, covered, and offered throughout the day.

But that doesn't necessarily mean that those people are going to end up buying from a breeder who checks all the boxes for breeding good and rearing healthy dogs and also for being a supportive breeder. On another note, I see MDBA as being certainly more supportive and more pro-active FOR (not yelling) breeders as well, when it comes to things such as stupid and unfavourable laws. Where is ANKC and/or your State Body of which you are a member when it has come to the many laws that have already made things difficult?

ok (Erny whispers) Sorry Sheridan. Just kidding. Couldn't help it.

Italics are used for emphasis. Caps is yelling. It's basic netiquette, something that I'm increasingly thinking should have a compulsory lesson before people are allowed on the Internet. From http://www.hoax-slayer.com/do-not-use-all-capitals.html My highlights and underscore. I didn't think Annie was yelling either, rather than placing emphasis on a few words to push her point/make her point clear. ETA: Sorry for the OT ..... but sometimes I use caps to emphasis a word or two here and there rather than using bold highlighting without any intention of yelling and to my knowledge I've not had people misinterpret my intentions.

I actually train the game of tug making sure that the dogs I'm working with get lots and lots of wins. The game is structured in such a way that the dog understands that this is your tug item and that you do control the game. Letting the dog win and win lots does not cause problems as was in the past thought to be the case, when you do it this way. If I was working with a dog who had rank aggression issues within the human household, I would not play tug let alone allow it to win, but this is far from the case in this instance. Who would be thrilled to engage in a game knowing that winning was impossible ? I certainly agree with Brinashay's advice of never training when you're upset, agitated or frustrated. :D ETA: The only thing I'd say that you need to watch with the tug game, Kyliegirl is for when your pup is teething. Go very gently on the puppy teeth (firm tension but with some empathy and 'give' in your elbow). I backed right off from playing tug for the short period during which my boy was teething so as to not hurt his mouth.