@elbrant said in solving the "bad breeder" problem::
@tanza you misunderstood my comments...
What if the AKC did link health testing to the registration process?
But it won't. And as registration itself is up to the breeder it would be academic anyway. Some irresponsible breeders do register their breeding stock with the AKC and some even do run health checks, but seldom on the entire litter. Maybe one of 6.
Most puppy farmers (puppy-mills) don't bother to register any of their Basenjis. There is no way to make them do so and thus linking health testing would be irrelevant.
Irresponsible breeding from bad breeders is going to continue - they are un-policeable. But newbies to the breed need to be warned to avoid them, not buy puppies from them, and if they do and get into trouble (puppy is incurably ill for example) they need support. Which they are unlikely to get from their breeder - hence the need for the Forum to give help where at all possible.
I have never queried Forum Rules - I just feel there are some areas where a little latitude should be permitted.
@zande said in solving the "bad breeder" problem::
Irresponsible breeding from bad breeders is going to continue - they are un-policeable. But newbies to the breed need to be warned to avoid them,
I agree - - I was just trying to "think outside the box" to see if we could find a more "politically correct" way to 1) discourage bad breeding practices, and 2) educate people.
@zande said in solving the "bad breeder" problem::
I have never queried Forum Rules - I just feel there are some areas where a little latitude should be permitted.
The problem is, sadly, that if you can "bad mouth" someone, everyone will jump in and we end up with a never ending flame war instead of productive solutions and a supportive community.
Furthermore, singling out one individual at a time is not going to put a dent in the overall issue. Which is where my thoughts were heading.... what organization would be the best group to help solve the problem. The AKC/CKC seemed like the logical answer to that question. I still think there is merit to the idea, so I'm up for discussing it further.
@elbrant I don't know how to solve the bad breeder problem. It's complicated. Breeders are not required to register dogs/pups nor health test them. And even if they were... there's no way to enforce that they do. There are no enforceable consequences. I suppose AKC or it's Canadian and European equivalents could ban future membership, but bad breeders are more than likely not members and couldn't care less if they were refused membership.
The other issue is that inexperienced adopters/buyers don't know about registration/health testing and how important it is to preserve and protect any purebred breed. It's just not important to them. It wasn't to us when I got Jengo. We just wanted a pet. Any consideration of a registered dog lasted about two milliseconds back then.
So, it becomes a vicious cycle. With uneducated/uninterested buyers, bad breeders who have no consequences continue to churn out puppies knowing they have a steady supply of buyers who carry wallets.
@jengosmonkey - Note that there is NO membership in AKC, only clubs (all breed clubs and specialty clubs) are members as a club, not individuals.
And you are totally correct, many times I would get puppy requests that the person says "not interested in a show dog, only a pet. Papers are not important".....
Many years ago a person that breeds had a Brindle dog that sire some of their litters. In looking at the pedigree for that dog there was NO brindles in that pedigree at all, so NO way did that pedigree match the dog.
And there are people selling puppies with a price of X with papers or a lower price without papers.... and what do they do with the puppy papers not used? Attach to another puppy... no way to track health testing in those cases.
AKC did put in a rule that if you had a dog that sire more than x amount of litters, that dog had to be DNA'ed with AKC, that is the only rule... and again, who is to say that is the DNA from that dog? And when that happened is when you saw these "pop-up" places to "register" puppies...
So there are ways to "beat the system".... AKC takes people at their word that what they are registering the sire/dam is the correct ones.
I knew a breeder (of another breed) who was sinking into Alzheimer's as she aged, and I think the last few years when she was still breeding it's quite likely that many of the pups she sold did not have the correct parents indicated on the registration papers. She was often confused and wasn't sure which male had serviced which bitch. Just to say, sometimes it isn't deliberate deceit. If you actually visit the breeder you may have a better idea of how organized (or not) they are....
"In order to get along with a Basenji, you have to be at least half as smart as the dog!"
@eeeefarm - I agree there are situations like this... but then they really should not be breeding... not to say it was "planned".... or deceit... however these days it is not easy to visit the breeder...
@tanza Yeah, yer right. AKC isn't a club per say. It's the governing body for registering and showing. It never dawned on me that people would fake a pedigree, or mix up dogs, or sell a pup with a mismatched pedigree. Unreal.
Clubs could ban or deny membership/s. When I was on the board of directors with my astronomy club we passed a bylaw that allowed us to ban/ deny membership. We've only used it once.
To beat a dead horse... wouldn't matter. The worst of the bad breeders I've heard of never show their dogs, so no need for AKC registration. Club membership? Why waste money on that? That money can be used for chains to keep the dogs in the yard. I'm tempted to use a middle finger emoji, but I won't.
I recognize the need to take this discussion in much more positive direction and outline HOW to identify responsible breeders, how to talk to them, what questions to ask and what to look for. That's going to take some time...
The phrase one most dreads is 'papers are not important' - because they ARE, even if you only want a pet and never intend to show or breed. But I have seen (scans from US) so-called Bills of Sale with a couple of call names scribbled on as parents. That is not ethical ! Purchasers should be given the registered names of parents so they can make a check that both are health tested. But therein lies another rub. Often the parents are neither registered nor health tested.
Over here the Kennel Club requires the breeder to register the entire litter, not sell pups and let new owners register (or not). But particularly since covid and the soaring demand for puppies, some people have bred litters with no intention of registering them. And no thought for health or compatibility of blood lines. Its all very worrying.
It's the law in Canada that no dog may be sold as purebred without being registered. "Any breeder selling a dog as purebred must register the dog and provide the new owner with the registration certificate within six months of the date of sale – this is the law, as required under the Animal Pedigree Act. " Of course, having a law and enforcing it are two different things....
"In order to get along with a Basenji, you have to be at least half as smart as the dog!"
@eeeefarm said in solving the "bad breeder" problem::
It's the law in Canada that no dog may be sold as purebred without being registered
I didn't know about that, but it is closely related to my concept of finding some "governing" body that would be able to regulate pure-bred animals in some fashion.
@eeeefarm said in solving the "bad breeder" problem::
having a law and enforcing it are two different things....
Exactly! Which was another point I was trying to make. We all need to understand that, regardless of our efforts, there will always be people who are "bad breeders". It's the whole ying & yang of the universe. There is always an "equal and opposite action".
@elbrant said in solving the "bad breeder" problem::
We all need to understand that, regardless of our efforts, there will always be people who are "bad breeders". It's the whole ying & yang of the universe. There is always an "equal and opposite action"
Which makes it all the more important that people be made aware of who is who, and who to avoid when making such an important purchase as a Basenji. No-one is seeking to change the status quo. We recognise it can't happen. But we do seek to let folks know more about the pitfalls and dangers.
@zande - Totally agree. Keep in mind that at least in the US, responsible breeders all KNOW each other.... when ones pop up or that been known as irresponsible breeders they need to be called out.
Among other things @elbrant, that is precisely what @tanza has been doing for years ! Advising them which site to go to to check parents have been health tested, telling them to make sure they get parents registered names, warning them of all kinds of things. But then, when things DO go wrong, being there to advise, with compassion and care. Advising people to go to Vets, even suggesting appropriate vets. Knowing that because a medication or food works for one dog, veterinary care should be sought before 'experimenting' on another which may well have totally different symptoms.
Above all, warning them that there ARE puppy farmers out there, and irresponsible breeders and how to identify them.
@zande - For sure Zande.... Thank you for that post and I now encourage people to go to FB Group and check out Basenji Puppies/Puppys/Puppy’s: Get Educated BEFORE you BUY! Names are there as we as responsible breeders do call out people/puppy mills/backyard breeders by name. Please note this is NOT without verification... lack of health testing, placing ill/sick puppies, no registration information (sire/dam pedigree)... etc... Even responsible breeders can have "shit" happen with pups/litters... however they are upfront and honest with this....
@zande said in solving the "bad breeder" problem::
that is precisely what @tanza has been doing for years
The problem with @tanza's (prior?) approach, first and foremost, she is pointing her finger at a specific person instead of using general terms describing indicators of a "bad breeder". Secondly, she is focusing on "helping" one person at a time.
What I am suggesting is something that would reach masses of people, not just one or two here and there. Perhaps the FB group is a good start.
@tanza I do hope that you can transition from naming names to discussing the traits of good vs bad breeding practices. Discussions that would be welcomed here.
@elbrant - Not to take this past this post, Elbrant, but unless we call out breeders that are irresponsible breeders.... it really does not help people.... that said, yes I am sure that there are many that got puppies that would be considered from not so responsible breeders and I hope that their pups have been health tested.... if not, please do so...
@elbrant said in solving the "bad breeder" problem::
@tanza I do hope that you can transition from naming names to discussing the traits of good vs bad breeding practices
@tanza already does ! do they, don't they health test ? do they, don't they support new owners ? do they, don't they provide accurate names of registered parents ? Do they, don't they . . . so many different aspects - along with recommendations to visit OFA.
Some people buy from BYBs and puppy mills and get lucky. They go home with a healthy pup who has had some semblance of training, is healthy and can easily be registered because the correct paperwork is forthcoming. Others don't.
to me you wrote Secondly, she is focusing on "helping" one person at a time.
But @elbrant, on the forum are so many individual owners with different problems - who need individual responses to their own specific need for help, advice, or even just to learn. It is great when other owners join in with advice and anecdotes of their own experiences in similar circumstances.
So I honestly don't see how you can complain that @tanza @me (zande), @eeeefarm, @so-many-helpful-people on this forum address one person's specific problems at a time.
@zande said in solving the "bad breeder" problem::
address one person's specific problems at a time.
...and in doing so, inform others who may have the same issue but were hesitant to post about it....
Not to mention non members who may monitor the forum but not join. IMO, the whole purpose of having a breed forum is to provide advice and support for anyone having difficulties in health, training, etc. and to a lesser extent for sharing amusing stories about our favourite breed.
@zande said in solving the "bad breeder" problem::
I honestly don't see how you can complain that @tanza @me (zande), @eeeefarm, @so-many-helpful-people on this forum address one person's specific problems at a time.
I commented that @tanza's approach was only reaching one person at a time. I also said that we should be reaching the multitudes of people looking into bringing home a puppy. It wasn't a complaint (about anyone). It was an observation and an analysis of undesirable effectiveness in comparison with this discussion, which we (collectively) should be using to consider potential ways to reach a vast number of people.
@tanza said in solving the "bad breeder" problem::
unless we call out breeders that are irresponsible breeders.... it really does not help people....
This discussion is not an opportunity to whine about not being allowed to "call out irresponsible breeders". Doing that could be interpreted as "slander, libel, and/or defamation of character". Things that the Forum could be sued for. It's not up for debate. I cannot, in good faith, allow it.
