The Most Dog Friendly Community Online
Join Dog Forum to Discuss Breeds, Training, Food and More

Join Now for Free
New posts

The Kennel Club Accredited Breeders Scheme

Join our free community today.

Connect with other like-minded dog lovers!

Login or Register
Jan Doherty said:
Seraphina said:
accredited breeder scheme
Here is a link to your KC according to this info;

When Accredited Breeders register a litter

 

Every time an Accredited Breeder registers a litter, the sire and dam of that litter are checked for compulsory permanent identification (microchip, tattoo or DNA profile are currently acceptable).  In addition, both sire and dam are checked for compulsory health screening scheme results that are relevant to their breed.  All the usual Kennel Club rules and regulations must be complied with.

That does not sound to me as something that any puppy farmer would want to subject himself.

Unfortunately it is just the thing a puppy farmer would do and pass on the cost to the'customer'. These people will do anything to appear creditableLitters and numbers of puppies registered by Accredited Breeders are monitored and compared with orders for additional puppy sales wallets.  If Accredited Breeders do not seem to be purchasing adequate supplies of wallets, they are contacted regarding this matter.  The Kennel Club has the facility for further investigation, as upon joining the Scheme all Accredited Breeders sign a declaration as follows:

and

The breeder agrees that the Kennel Club may visit facilities upon giving reasonable notice.

Unless the Kennel Club employ some one to do this it is highly unlikely that it will happen and only if they receive acomplaint about the breeder. Most Puppy farmers are canny enough not to let customers into the breeding areas, the dogs are brought to you

If there are issues of concern arising from a visit and it is considered that the facilities fall short of the standards expected for an Accredited Breeder then this may result in the breeder being removed form the scheme.

So what they just go back to advertising on the open internet or in trade papers

 

Full details of what is involved and expected of an Accredited Breeder for a Breeder Adviser visit are available on request.

Sounds to me perfectly reasonable, and frankly I cannot understand why people would not pay their 20 pounds and then work with the KC to improve, tighten the rules?  It is certainly lot better than the official listing we have here.  :)

Click to expand...
Having looked at the scheme I am still at a loss as to how this is working with the kennel Club? All it means is that you have a permeanant advert and outlet for puppies. We have something called the breed record supplement here which shows every puppy registered. The commercial breeds such as Cavaliers have pages and pages printed many from the same breeder so even having their names in print for the world to see does not stop them and the Kennel Club just keeps on taking the registration fees. Its all about revenue Im afraid and so is the accredited breeders scheme

Click to expand...

dead right Jan
 
Kurwenal said:
Jan Doherty said:
Seraphina said:
accredited breeder scheme
Here is a link to your KC according to this info;

When Accredited Breeders register a litter

 

Every time an Accredited Breeder registers a litter, the sire and dam of that litter are checked for compulsory permanent identification (microchip, tattoo or DNA profile are currently acceptable).  In addition, both sire and dam are checked for compulsory health screening scheme results that are relevant to their breed.  All the usual Kennel Club rules and regulations must be complied with.

That does not sound to me as something that any puppy farmer would want to subject himself.

Unfortunately it is just the thing a puppy farmer would do and pass on the cost to the'customer'. These people will do anything to appear creditableLitters and numbers of puppies registered by Accredited Breeders are monitored and compared with orders for additional puppy sales wallets.  If Accredited Breeders do not seem to be purchasing adequate supplies of wallets, they are contacted regarding this matter.  The Kennel Club has the facility for further investigation, as upon joining the Scheme all Accredited Breeders sign a declaration as follows:

and

The breeder agrees that the Kennel Club may visit facilities upon giving reasonable notice.

Unless the Kennel Club employ some one to do this it is highly unlikely that it will happen and only if they receive acomplaint about the breeder. Most Puppy farmers are canny enough not to let customers into the breeding areas, the dogs are brought to you

If there are issues of concern arising from a visit and it is considered that the facilities fall short of the standards expected for an Accredited Breeder then this may result in the breeder being removed form the scheme.

So what they just go back to advertising on the open internet or in trade papers

 

Full details of what is involved and expected of an Accredited Breeder for a Breeder Adviser visit are available on request.

Sounds to me perfectly reasonable, and frankly I cannot understand why people would not pay their 20 pounds and then work with the KC to improve, tighten the rules?  It is certainly lot better than the official listing we have here.   :)

Click to expand...
Having looked at the scheme I am still at a loss as to how this is working with the kennel Club? All it means is that you have a permeanant advert and outlet for puppies. We have something called the breed record supplement here which shows every puppy registered. The commercial breeds such as Cavaliers have pages and pages printed many from the same breeder so even having their names in print for the world to see does not stop them and the Kennel Club just keeps on taking the registration fees. Its all about revenue Im afraid and so is the accredited breeders scheme

Click to expand...

dead right Jan

Click to expand...
She sure is! :thumbsup:
 
Absolutely Jan. I agree with everything you say and I think you have answered any doubters.
 
lets be honest the whole kennel club scheme is about making money. ;) and where does all this money go i ask myself?apart from subsidised lunches for members in london that is. o:)
 
I doubt that there will be huge profit made on this scheme. To start with to set it up would not be cheap, then they have to employ somebody to check on breeders. I believe that at present the KC does not have the automatic right to visit any breeder, however when getting accredited the breeder signs document, which gives them the right.

Also the accredited breeder signs that all his breeding stock is microchipped and screened for any relevant problems. Again that makes it impossible to use bitches in the manner described in previous posts.

I find it rather interesting that all you guys know exactly what is and what is not going to happen. Obviously you all have very precise crystal balls. :)

If you really have the best for the breed in mind you should try to make this scheme work, not boycott it. Any attempt to control breeding is a step in the right direction. The KC may not be using the right words to get you to join, maybe you should write to them and explain why you find the promise of making money offensive. You cannot on one hand complain about puppy farmers being members of the KC and then slag of scheme, which is trying to weed out those who do not do the right thing.

Of-course, nothing will ever weed out all bad apples, but at least they are trying. :thumbsup:

And even if somebody who should not be accredited gets in, hopefully they will not last. But you cannot condemn person for what he may do in the future.

OK maybe “accredited†was not the best choice of word. Maybe when people should be first called “provisionally accredited†or something like that, and become fully accredited after couple of litters? Except that may spur people to breed more.
 
Seraphina said:
I doubt that there will be huge profit made on this scheme.  To start with to set it up would not be cheap, then they have to  employ somebody to check on breeders.  I believe that at present the KC does not have the automatic right to visit any breeder, however when getting accredited the breeder signs document, which gives them the right.
Also the accredited breeder signs that all his breeding stock is microchipped and screened for any relevant problems.  Again that makes it impossible to use bitches in the manner described in previous posts.

I find it rather interesting that all you guys know exactly what is and what is not going to happen.  Obviously you all have very precise crystal balls.  :)

If you really have the best for the breed in mind you should try to make this scheme work, not boycott it.  Any attempt to control breeding is a step in the right direction.  The KC may not be using the right words to get you to join, maybe you should write to them and explain why you find the promise of making money offensive.  You cannot on one hand complain about puppy farmers being members of the KC and then slag of scheme, which is trying to weed out those who do not do the right thing.

Of-course, nothing will ever weed out all bad apples, but at least they are trying. :thumbsup:

And even if somebody who should not be accredited gets in, hopefully they will not last.  But you cannot condemn person for what he may do in the future. 

OK maybe “accredited†was not the best choice of word.  Maybe when people should be first called “provisionally accredited†or something like that, and become fully accredited after couple of litters?  Except that may spur people to breed more.

Click to expand...
Have you actually bred any dogs in this country? Maybe those of us who have see the overall picture.
 
Seraphina said:
I doubt that there will be huge profit made on this scheme.  To start with to set it up would not be cheap, then they have to  employ somebody to check on breeders.  I believe that at present the KC does not have the automatic right to visit any breeder, however when getting accredited the breeder signs document, which gives them the right. The Kennel Club is a profit making organisation. Profits being made here are a lot more subtle that the £20 fee. Profits will come from such things as selling insurance, 5 generation pedigrees, registering as well as transfers of puppies. In the UK there is such a thing called the Dog Club which registers puppies and has drawn away registrations from the Kennel Club hence the need to bring people back to the fold.

The right to visit breeders premises already rests with the local councils and I doubt the KC will actively involve themselves in visiting breeders premises. They have certainly distanced themselves in the past from any unpleasantness involving some of their top judges and their breeding practices

Also the accredited breeder signs that all his breeding stock is microchipped and screened for any relevant problems.  Again that makes it impossible to use bitches in the manner described in previous posts.

It will not stop bitches from being over used any more than it does now. Bitches can be breed every season so long as it falls into the correct age category ( I think over a year and under 8 yrs) As previously stated all litters appear in the breed record supplement and that certainly doesnt embarrass them seeing the same bitches appearing every 6 months.

With regards any relevant health problems an example is Iggies who have epilepsy, leg perthes, Leg breaks and this is well known but because it has not been researched it does not appear on the list of herditory illnesses, check any info on iggies and they will say that it is health clear, so no tests would have to be carried out. That is the same for many breeds.

I find it rather interesting that all you guys know exactly what is and what is not going to happen.  Obviously you all have very precise crystal balls.  :)

I think that we all know enough about the british dog scene to make such predictions - yes

If you really have the best for the breed in mind you should try to make this scheme work, not boycott it.  Any attempt to control breeding is a step in the right direction.  The KC may not be using the right words to get you to join, maybe you should write to them and explain why you find the promise of making money offensive.  You cannot on one hand complain about puppy farmers being members of the KC and then slag of scheme, which is trying to weed out those who do not do the right thing.

The accredited bredder scheme is in no way an attempt to control breeding.

Puppy farmers or anyone else who is an accredited breeder do not get membership to the Kennel club it is for a very select few and you have to be invited. Perhaps if it was an open membership their activities wouldnt be viewed with such suspicion.

Of-course, nothing will ever weed out all bad apples, but at least they are trying. :thumbsup:

And even if somebody who should not be accredited gets in, hopefully they will not last.  But you cannot condemn person for what he may do in the future. 

OK maybe “accredited†was not the best choice of word.  Maybe when people should be first called “provisionally accredited†or something like that, and become fully accredited after couple of litters?  Except that may spur people to breed more.

Click to expand...
Unfortunately those who shouldnt get in will last.There is no criteria to join so even if you dont own a dog you can join. I think the reason why people are so oppossed to this scheme is due to the loathing that the British have of puppy farmers in general. And anything and I mean absolutely anything that will help them to sell puppies is not a good thing. Dont you think if the scheme was that good the top producers would be registering with it?
 
Mabelline said:
As usual Jan, well informed and dead right.
Click to expand...
I couldn't agree more!

Jan is absolutely spot on with all her points. It's concise & clear. So everyone should understand it!!! :thumbsup:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mabelline said:
Have you actually bred any dogs in this country? Maybe those of us who have see the overall picture.
Click to expand...
No I have not nor will. That puts me in unique position of not having personal interest in this. It is always easier to look at the whole picture from bit of a distance. :) Especially as most of the people here are looking at it from the point of view of IG breeder.

I am very interested to see how this works, as we definitely need something better than we do have here. Although small steps have been taken. The most significant being that from this year (here in Victoria) the VCA will not register pups unless they are microchipped. And the pups are registered on the microchipping register in the breeders' name. When the pups go to their new homes the new owners name is listed, but the breeders' particulars remain forever. That will give the authorities info about breeders who churn out pups, which are ending dumped. I have been advocating for this for years, so i am thrilled it has finally been implemented. It may take a little while to have any impact, but at least it is a step in the right direction. Maybe that would be something you could propose to your KC? And yes, i would expect that breeder should have all their dogs tested before he is accepted into the scheme. But eliminating dogs with genetic disorder can produce whole lot of other problems, especially in a breed as rare as IG. That would only further reduce the gene pool.

When i first read about "Accredited Breeders Scheme" my first reaction was that people should be accepted on their merit, but immediately I realised that would be very difficult to do. How would you decide who is "top producer"? Is it person who bred number of champions? .... got most placings at shows? ....bred the most litters? That could be very problematic. And who would decide?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"I am very interested to see how this works, as we definitely need something better than we do have here. Although small steps have been taken. The most significant being that from this year (here in Victoria) the VCA will not register pups unless they are microchipped. And the pups are registered on the microchipping register in the breeders' name. When the pups go to their new homes the new owners name is listed, but the breeders' particulars remain forever. That will give the authorities info about breeders who churn out pups, which are ending dumped"

That would be a very good idea unfortunately the micro chip people are nothing to do with the KC and the politically correct numpties who run this country would quote data protection at you. Even the breed clubs who publish members lists are open to the Data protection police. Yet anyone who has obtained my telephone or fax number can sell it on to who they like. :rant:

Are you starting to get the gist now of what life in the UK is about. :- "
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Seraphina said:
Mabelline said:
Have you actually bred any dogs in this country? Maybe those of us who have see the overall picture.

Click to expand...
No I have not nor will. That puts me in unique position of not having personal interest in this. It is always easier to look at the whole picture from bit of a distance. :) Especially as most of the people here are looking at it from the point of view of IG breeder.

Actually most of us are looking at this from the point of view of people who care deeply about the welfare of dogs in general - accreditation of breeders of dubious credentials is not conducive to the welfare of any breed.

Those of us who have been involved in dogs in the UK for a while are "in the unique position" of being able to comment on this scheme and its shortcomings in an informed manner, and with knowledge of how thinks work in the UK. Yes the information on the KC website all appears good on the surface re the KCAB, but unfortunately, it really is not like that in practice. Maybe the intentions of the KC were honorable, BUT unless the scheme is rigorously policed, and those without suitable credentials to be accredited are refused membership, or removed from the list, then many people will not wish to be listed alongside these people.

As for compulsory microchipping of all puppies this would take away the other choices available to those of us (myself included) who do not routinely use microchips because of the risk of migration etc - Mictochips DO migrate, whatever vets might say, and to place chips inbetween scapulae of very fine skinned/boned dogs, and which are supposed to be running breeds in my view is not always sensible. Of course for pet passport etc it is compulsory and sometimes we do not have a choice. It is relatively easy for unscupulous people to very quickly remove these microchips anyway

Jan ois also dead right when she comments on the ridiculous level of political correctness, and selective enforcement of data protection laws etc.
Click to expand...
 
Kurwenal said:
Seraphina said:
Mabelline said:
Have you actually bred any dogs in this country? Maybe those of us who have see the overall picture.

Click to expand...
No I have not nor will. That puts me in unique position of not having personal interest in this. It is always easier to look at the whole picture from bit of a distance. :) Especially as most of the people here are looking at it from the point of view of IG breeder.

Actually most of us are looking at this from the point of view of people who care deeply about the welfare of dogs in general - accreditation of breeders of dubious credentials is not conducive to the welfare of any breed.

Those of us who have been involved in dogs in the UK for a while are "in the unique position" of being able to comment on this scheme and its shortcomings in an informed manner, and with knowledge of how thinks work in the UK. Yes the information on the KC website all appears good on the surface re the KCAB, but unfortunately, it really is not like that in practice. Maybe the intentions of the KC were honorable, BUT unless the scheme is rigorously policed, and those without suitable credentials to be accredited are refused membership, or removed from the list, then many people will not wish to be listed alongside these people.

As for compulsory microchipping of all puppies this would take away the other choices available to those of us (myself included) who do not routinely use microchips because of the risk of migration etc - Mictochips DO migrate, whatever vets might say, and to place chips inbetween scapulae of very fine skinned/boned dogs, and which are supposed to be running breeds in my view is not always sensible. Of course for pet passport etc it is compulsory and sometimes we do not have a choice. It is relatively easy for unscupulous people to very quickly remove these microchips anyway

Jan ois also dead right when she comments on the ridiculous level of political correctness, and selective enforcement of data protection laws etc.

Click to expand...
In fact if you look at the application form for accreditation - there are only about 2 lines on the page that ask about experience - 45% of the form is for your name and address and 50% of the form is for your payment details - I rest my case
Click to expand...
 
Jan Doherty said:
"I am very interested to see how this works, as we definitely need something better than we do have here. Although small steps have been taken. The most significant being that from this year (here in Victoria) the VCA will not register pups unless they are microchipped. And the pups are registered on the microchipping register in the breeders' name. When the pups go to their new homes the new owners name is listed, but the breeders' particulars remain forever. That will give the authorities info about breeders who churn out pups, which are ending dumped"
That would be a very good idea unfortunately the micro chip people are nothing to do with the KC and the politically correct numpties who run this country would quote data protection at you. Even the breed clubs who publish members lists are open to the Data protection police. Yet anyone who has obtained my telephone or fax number can sell it on to who they like. :rant:

Are you starting to get the gist now of what life in the UK is about. :- "

Click to expand...
No, the microchip registry has nothing to do with the KC here either, but the pounds, RSPCA and all vets can access the records of animal they scan. So the RSPCA can compile a list of breeders who produce dogs, which end up dumped.

I have to admit I fought long and hard against microchips, argued instead for tattoos. Or at least for people to have the choice. But the microchips won, and yes I have one Whippet with her microchip right at the point of her shoulder, but it moved there almost immediately after she was done at 6 weeks. Now I do my pups at 8 weeks, and so far so good.
 
Microchip or tattoo, as long as they are permanently marked before they leave the breeder.

Our KC also does not like to be involved in any unpleasantness. Of-course, they exist to promote purebred dogs, and more pups people breed more money they get. More money they get more they can do. There is a bit of a conflict of interest. :)

As I said it is very difficult to judge people’s worthiness or other ways for accreditation purposes. I have met people who after lifetime of breeding show winning dogs still believed in telegony and other old wives’ tales. (w00t)

On the other hand by the time I bred my first litter I spent close to 20 years of intensive research on dog breeding. That is if I count that I decided to breed and show dogs that moment when I was taken to my first dog show, aged 6. :) When I was 10 I became a friend with a girl whose father worked at large veterinary hospital/research institute. He would bring for me any book I wanted from their extensive library. By the time I was 15 I have read books and papers about inheritance, nutrition, whelping, rearing, temperament etc. When I finally started to show my first Great Dane I had a vast knowledge, both about the breed and about dogs in general.

The way I understand this KCAB scheme is that helps people buying pet pup to get it from a breeders who do the right thing by their dogs and the buyers. People who do not do the right thing will hopefully not last.

People who want a show quality pup need to go to shows, learn about the breed and decide for themselves which breeder has the type of a dog they like. No scheme can help with that. Especially with a breed like IG, which at least here in OZ seems to be very diverse lot.

I just think that it is lot more helpful to come up with some real, workable proposals than being totally negative and dismissive.
 
Seraphina said:
I just think that it is lot more helpful to come up with some real, workable proposals than being totally negative and dismissive.
Click to expand...

One thing we are not is negative because we are positive its not a good scheme. (w00t)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to Dog Forum!

Join our vibrant online community dedicated to all things canine. Whether you're a seasoned owner or new to the world of dogs, our forum is your go-to hub for sharing stories, seeking advice, and connecting with fellow dog lovers. From training tips to health concerns, we cover it all. Register now and unleash the full potential of your dog-loving experience!

Login or Register
Back
Top