Registering Question

[beagle_lovergirl]

I can't believe this passed by my mind until now! Anyway, I want to know if a Dog that is registered with the Kennel Club (Brazillian Kennel Club to be exact) will be automaticaly registere in the AKC or do I have to register her again?

[Mordy]

you'll have to register her.
http://www.akc.org/rules/special_reg...ces.cfm?page=2

personally i prefer the UKC over the AKC tho, they put more importance on a well rounded dog that is able to perform the job it was bred for (not just looks) and have a better code of ethics plus a puppy mill policy, which AKC doesn't have.

[beagle_lovergirl]

Does the UKC have shows here, in the US? And isn't it possible for a dog to be able to do it's job and be show quality? Sorry for the questions, I new at this showing stuff

[Richie12345]

Mordy, I love you, jk, but really, I've heard that AKC worries more about the looks of a dog and now the original reason why they were bred.

Originally Posted by beagle_lovergirl

Does the UKC have shows here, in the US? And isn't it possible for a dog to be able to do it's job and be show quality? Sorry for the questions, I new at this showing stuff

Well, let's put it this way.......UKC recognizes and registers 300 breeds of dog. If it has 4 legs and a tail, you can register it. AKC only recognizes somewhere in the range of 186 breeds as being purebred.

You might be wise to rely on those with experience actually breeding, showing and registering pups for your answers. Oh, and a UKC championship is more or less a joke. Of course those of us who are AKC are a bit prejudiced, lol.

And as for conformation and working, YES AKC encourages both. It is the members of the AKC and parent clubs who determine the policies of the AKC. AKC is simply a registration body. The delegates to the AKC make the rules, and see that they are enforced.

AKC sponsers agility and field trials......and of course obedience. The purpose of conformation showing is to ensure that the dog is properly built for the job it was intended to do.....not just a beauty contest. The shows determine which dogs meet the breed standard most closely.

[showpug]

Originally Posted by Manchesters

Well, let's put it this way.......UKC recognizes and registers 300 breeds of dog. If it has 4 legs and a tail, you can register it. AKC only recognizes somewhere in the range of 186 breeds as being purebred.

You might be wise to rely on those with experience actually breeding, showing and registering pups for your answers. Oh, and a UKC championship is more or less a joke. Of course those of us who are AKC are a bit prejudiced, lol.

Not only that, but if you really want to get into showing here in the US then AKC is the way to go for the shear fact that they have regularly planned shows that occur on a regular basis.

I really don't understand the predjudice that a lot of members on this forum have against AKC. I truly wonder the degree of experience you have had with the organization itself, the breed clubs, attending shows and showing dogs.

I know many dual champions that hold titles in the field, obedience ring, herding trials AND in the conformation show ring-ALL ARE AKC!!! I know many pugs to date that not only have their conformation title, but they also have their CD and do work as therapy dogs.

To come out and say the AKC is bad does not make any sense. Yes, there are people out there that care only about the beauty contest and not about conforming to standard, but those people are in the UKC AS WELL!!!!

It's up to the exhibitors to preserve what their breed was meant to do and breed ethically with purpose in mind, not the registry.

[Renee750il]

Pugs, you're right. It's just a registry. Unfortunately, a breed having the AKC 'seal of approval' all too often is the death-knell for the integrity of the breed. I haven't seen the AKC do much in the way of emphasizing that some breeds are just NOT for most owners and there seems to be a significant amount of breeding down temperaments to create homogeny across the breed boards. I shudder to think of what will happen to the Neo now that it has received recognition - and all the subsequent publicity (without any appreciable mention of the fact that very few people are capable of being effective Neo owners).

And the conformation standards seem to morph drastically in some breeds. The German Shepherd, for one, is almost unrecognizable now.

And don't you find it a bit laughable that the AKC is just now 'recognizing' a breed that has been in existance as a unique breed for over 400 years?

[Fran27]

My problem with AKC is that they are doing nothing to prevent puppy mills and backyard breeders, and you know why? Because they get money from those who register their litters. It just seems to me they don't care about the breeds, just about money... Having a registered pup really doesn't mean much does it?

I read an interesting article about it, I can't find it anymore though...

[showpug]

Originally Posted by Renee750il

Pugs, you're right. It's just a registry. Unfortunately, a breed having the AKC 'seal of approval' all too often is the death-knell for the integrity of the breed. I haven't seen the AKC do much in the way of emphasizing that some breeds are just NOT for most owners and there seems to be a significant amount of breeding down temperaments to create homogeny across the breed boards. I shudder to think of what will happen to the Neo now that it has received recognition - and all the subsequent publicity (without any appreciable mention of the fact that very few people are capable of being effective Neo owners).

And the conformation standards seem to morph drastically in some breeds. The German Shepherd, for one, is almost unrecognizable now.

And don't you find it a bit laughable that the AKC is just now 'recognizing' a breed that has been in existance as a unique breed for over 400 years?

Well, I just don't know enough about the 400 year old breed to know if it's laughable or not. I don't know what the history of the breeding has been nor do I know when the breed clubs first tried to get it accepted by the AKC and so on.

There is no part of me that disagrees with what you have to say about some breeds within AKC, like the GSD's, BUT that is also a general statement about breeds in general and does not apply to all breeds registerd by the AKC. Everyone always reverts back to blaming the registry for the sins of the breeders, exhibitors and most of all, the breed clubs. I guess I am someone who feels responsibility should lie in the hands of the people, not the registry itself and that the people who love and work to preserve a breed should be ultimatley responsible for it's future, not the registry. It's up to the people that love the breed the most to control it. Unfortunatley GSD's are one of the most political breeds on the face of the earth and their breeders, exhibitors and breed clubs have allowed it to be taken too far and in turn let their dogs down.

I guess what bothers me is generalizing. Everyone always uses GSD's as an example, and they are a good one, but how about some others!

I urge those of you who are quick to judge the AKC to attend (NOT WATCH ON TV) a couple of dog shows and see what you think. Talk to the exhibitors and look at the breeds. Watch them move, watch the terriers spar in the ring to test their tenacity and so on. Get a feel for it and make your own mind up. I know some very honorable, ethical and protective people all of which I have met through showing in AKC. Many of them are very concerned with preserving a breeds original purpose.