Would it put you off if..

[Possiblebreeder]

A breeder was fully health testing their breeding dogs (full health screens eg hip scores, DNA tests etc) but the dogs and resultant puppies were not Kennel Club registered?

Yes, it’s probably because the bitch has too many litters to register or is too young or too old to be bred from.

Otherwise why wouldn’t you register?

Otherwise why wouldn’t you register?

We don’t agree with the breed standard for the dog breed we have; following it puts the dogs at increased risk of BOAS, hip dysplasia, Hydrocephalus and CM/Syringomyelia.

We have no intention of breeding dogs to the ‘standard’ so it seems a bit pointless to Kennel Club register.

Did you ask breeder why?

If the breeder is prepared to give you the mothers KC name, you can check id she already has had 4 litters as allowed by the kennel club.

By law, under licence, they are allowed to have up to 6 litters.

I would check both out and make a decision from there.

KC is only a data base for pedigrees it does not guarantee the health/ quality of the puppy.

No, I'm not really bothered about KC registration - it means very little in the grand scheme of things.

Puppy farms can KC register. It's not the mark of a good breeder or of healthy puppies.

But I would want to know how many litters the mum had had.

It sounds like you have a really good attitude to breeding healthy functional dogs.

I think if you explain your reasons to potential puppy parents then you would have plenty of interest - obviously not from people wanting to breed and/or show the pups, but they are really quite a small proportion - i can see the appeal for pet owners of the predictability (size/temperament etc) of a pedigree but that hopefully is going to be less at risk from breed specific problems and isn’t going to cost them thousands in vet bills.

Yes, it would put me off. If the parents aren't registered I can't verify health tests or check inbreeding coefficient. I see no reason not to register, so that would raise my suspicions.

Accepting that KC registration is no guarantee of health or quality, I still don’t quite understand why you wouldn’t register an eligible litter? Unless you’re planning to exhibit them at shows then adherence to the breed standard can be somewhat variable anyway - I’m thinking of things like the split between working and show type cocker spaniels, all eligible for registration but a huge variation of type.

Why that breed at all, if you don’t agree with the standard? (I am playing devil’s advocate here, I’m aware of Cruffa-esque efforts to change breeds from within, just curious why this and not a new breed/type/cross instead)

If the parents aren't registered I can't verify health tests or check inbreeding coefficient
I need to do more research but Embark appear to have a DNA test that can test two potential mates and identify if they are related...

I wouldn't buy a pedigree dog that wasn't KC registered. To me it would be a huge red flag. There could be a breeding restriction on the dog or bitch because of something like epilepsy, it could be a sibling or related mating, it could be a blue to blue mating, it could be too many litters from the bitch or a multiple sire mating.

I think people place too much emphasis on being KG registered. Sadly the scheme is not for for purpose, it is very easy to use it as a smokescreen for very dodgy breeding practices.

@ANameChangeAgain

I wouldn't buy a pedigree dog that wasn't KC registered. To me it would be a huge red flag. There could be a breeding restriction on the dog or bitch because of something like epilepsy, it could be a sibling or related mating, it could be a blue to blue mating, it could be too many litters from the bitch or a multiple sire mating.

Of these, the Kennel Club record/enforce the number of litters registerable per bitch and sibling or close relative matings - the rest of your examples would (rightly or wrongly) be perfectly eligible for registration.

I don't think anyone is saying that KC registration alone is the guarantee of a good breeder but lack of registration raises questions.

When looking I saw adverts stating that pups were the product of kc registered parents but they weren't registering as they wanted them to go to pet homes! Just raises so many questions, if they're eligible why not register, the breed standard is irrelevant? If they're ineligible that raises different questions.

@Possiblebreeder

Otherwise why wouldn’t you register?

We don’t agree with the breed standard for the dog breed we have; following it puts the dogs at increased risk of BOAS, hip dysplasia, Hydrocephalus and CM/Syringomyelia.

We have no intention of breeding dogs to the ‘standard’ so it seems a bit pointless to Kennel Club register.

KC registration is nothing to do with breed standards - there are breeders of quite a few breeds who are purposefully breeding away from what wins in shows, it’s not a reason not to register them.

All the KC registration is - is a list of who the dogs ancestors are, that they are in fact that breed and eligible to be included... and makes all their health tests easily accessible.

So there are plenty of dodgy reasons not to KC register a litter, but no real positive ones.

@Possiblebreeder

Otherwise why wouldn’t you register?

We don’t agree with the breed standard for the dog breed we have; following it puts the dogs at increased risk of BOAS, hip dysplasia, Hydrocephalus and CM/Syringomyelia.

We have no intention of breeding dogs to the ‘standard’ so it seems a bit pointless to Kennel Club register.

KC reg doesn't mean anything in terms of breed standard or conformation - just the dogs ARE pedigree and their parentage can be traced.

I have a KC reg Golden retriever who is nothing like the larger, pale coloured, show lines. She is from KC reg working stock. I could show her - but she wouldn't get placed as she does not conform to the standard according to the show people.

I prefer a slim, healthy dog that was bred to do a job of work and has the right temperament. Her breeder registers the pups and registers all of the health tests, no reason why you can't do the same. Most breeders of working lines (in many breeds) have dogs that wouldn't match a show conformation but they are still registered. Those lines are important to maintain so that exaggerations can be bred out - once the dog showing world gets shamed into banning them.

Personally I wouldn't buy a pedigree that didn't have KC reg.

I wasn't put off. But I knew the owner, I knew the (non- registered but pure breed) dam and two of her (only) previous litter and their temperament, there were DNA tests to confirm the dam's breed and a full suite of health tests for her and the (KC registered) sire. Litter raised in a lovely home environment and we visited loads. All the available pups (the breeder kept one)were reserved before birth by word of mouth. So I felt more comfortable than buying a KC registered puppy from someone unknown.

However, I'd be put off buying from an unknown breeder who wasn't registering purebred puppies.

I knew someone many years ago who refused to register his puppies because of a principled disagreement with the Kennel Club's breed standards and their inaction about health problems with that breed. So I would understand your position if you explained it. But I'd have to respond to your ad first and as a random buyer, sadly I might not.

I wouldn't be put off at all. I'm more interested in what the parents are like and the health checks. I disagree with the inbreeding and exaggerated features the Kennel Club encourages. I think you will find there will be many people who are not put off.

There's no reason not to register if the pups actually can be.
Dodgy breeders will give you all kinds of excuses ... KC taking to long to issue papers, people don't want to pay the extra, pups are only pets et al.
In truth the reason is normally that they are overbreeding their bitch.

I would be very, very wary, for all the reasons which people have said.

I'd also add - how will your breed improve if there are no examples of functional pedigree dogs within it, as the breeder purposefully does not register them?

I'd also add - how will your breed improve if there are no examples of functional pedigree dogs within it, as the breeder purposefully does not register them?
I’m not sure functional is a term I’d use to describe the show dog/Kennel Club world really.
A lot of the breeds are pretty far removed from ‘functional’ and in a lot of breeds, like the spaniels mentioned up thread, the difference between the Kennel Club version and working is pretty stark.

Are you not registering your litter because you disagree with the principle of selective breeding? I.e. what the Kennel club essentially promotes and stands for? In that case I wouldn't be put off if I knew you very well.

Otherwise .. I would run the other way. Why would you not? Unless bitch is older than 8, has already had 2 C sections or more than 4 reg litters. It'd make me immediately suspicious about the breeder's motivations.

Most ads that have KC reg parents but not pups makes me think probably not eligible to register pups because they've not sought permission to lift breeding restriction on Dam/Sire or one of the other KC reasons listed which suggest aren't great breeders. I doubt it would effect pup sales though.

I've found the KC register quite useful to check parents health tests and breeding coefficients, some were surprisingly high %, age first bred & time span between litters.

I'm not sure it matters if you breed a different type to show standard as tbh work/pet bred often don't look alike but still recognisable as same breed. If it's a long term aim to improve breeds health then may find other like minded breeders may want to use your lines in future, but lack of KC reg will then be restrictive.

Yes it would put me off because I would think you were trying to hide something negative in the fact that you didn't meet the 'standards' to register them.

“like the spaniels mentioned up thread, the difference between the Kennel Club version and working is pretty stark”

But working ones are KC registered...

Basically I’d assume you were using unregistered or endorsed dogs to breed from, or overbreeding or inbreeding...KC registration is so basic that I wouldn’t even contact you to ask why they aren’t registered, I’d just keep looking for a breeder.

Will you find plenty of people to buy puppies? Probably, lots of people seem to research buying a phone more than a puppy.

I can’t understand how not agreeing with breed standard means you don’t register. They don’t come round and check. I agree that KC is far from a mark of an excellent breeder. It just means pedigree.
I would assume that the parents were related. Or bitch had been overbred.