Hi all, as far as I understand it, UK is the only European country which is not a FCI member and I am puzzled as to why? Really curious and would be grateful for an explanation. :)

some breed standards (the once that I know of) in the UK differ from the FCI once and it looks like UK is the only European country that doesn't require pedigree dogs to be shown at least once in order to qualify for breeding. Under FCI rules dog/bitch has to be shown at least once to prove that it is with accordance to the breed standard in order to be allowed to be used in a breeding programme).

But what astonishes me the most is that UK KC does not recognize FCI titles ( i.e. titles of every other country in Europe other than UK):
"The Kennel Club General Committee has decided that FCI titles will not be added to a dog's UK Registration or Stud Book records. This includes the records of Imported and ATC dogs. Exhibitors are advised that even with official confirmation from the FCI, FCI titles should not be included on UK show entry forms."
http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/cgi-bin ... gi?id=2324

Thank you! :)

I can't answer it but i'm with you on this it doesn't make sense that we do things so very differently.

> some breed standards (the once that I know of) in the UK differ from the FCI

Surely a breed should be the same the world over, how can it make any sense having differences?

> FCI rules dog/bitch has to be shown at least once to prove that it is with accordance to the breed standard in order to be allowed to be used in a breeding programme).

What a bloody good idea, but how do they start to implement this? But then this would go against the grain of working dogs in what ever field they are in, as their lines would be different on a working aspect, say for instance Labs. So proving themselves in their field of choice would also need to be covered, including that of working sheepdogs.

There are many things I think the KC should be doing, or trying to implement, like compulsary health tests and they won't register litter if they are not satisfactory, putting in place temperament tests for all breeds and enough that people can get them done on their dogs.

To reply to the first paragraph why would we wish to change a long established system, what would be the point. To answer the second I am not sure they do not recognise the FCI titles it is that they are no longer adding them to the dogs name, don't know why but as more and more dogs are popping across the channel to collect a few it has probable got out of hand and the KC finds its self unable to confirm them all.

Just read the bit about dogs being shown before breeding - that can only be those that are registered one would think because I am sure all the strays you see running the streets in many countries in Europe have never been near a comb never mind a show ring - is that what you wish to see in the UK.

> putting in place temperament tests for all breeds and enough that people can get them done on their dogs.

I see where you're at - but to be honest, while I will stand 100% by the temperament of my dogs, don't you think that a bad temperament would be no good in the show ring anyway?  Surely, it just wouldn't get placed?   Or am I being naive?

I don't know about Labradors and hunting dogs but working group dogs under FCI in many countries (maybe in all of the countries, I cant guarantee I only know of 6 for sure)   HAVE to have a training certificate like IPO or shuzhund in order to get a champion title. They can win the shows and qualify for the champion title and can be bred but will only officially become a champion after they pass the training certificate....

I had to wait with my dog for 5 month after he qualified for a ch title before he actually got it cos we ware passing IPO...

I was amazed to find out that you can have a working breed as a champion without ever training him...

Schnauzers, for example, are German breed. Germans came out with the breed and the breed standard... the rest of Europe respects that and follows that breed standard, but not uk :) it has its own.... And I just want to understand why and what's the point...

> Surely, it just wouldn't get placed?   Or am I being naive?

I think so Jean, i've seen some really bad tempered dogs at shows, and i'm not talking about dog aggression either.
These dogs weren't left alone on benches either, they were with their handlers..

ETA: Not bad tempered towards judges but towards other people and handlers.

Nova, sorry, I am confused, how is showing a pedigree dog before breeding it related to strays or FCI?

UK shelters are also full of strays I don't think its a European mainland problem only or relevant to the current topic....

No Jean SW, a dog with a poor temperament would not do well, if shy it would not show, if aggressive it would be dismissed un-judged. OK it may get away with it on one occasion but not for long most judges will not tolerate being threatened or worse by their exhibits.

In respect of the working group, I guess you can say the same thing for the gundog group over here. They can be show ch's but to gain full CH status they have to gain their working titles - correct me someone if i'm wrong here :-)

I guess with the working dogs its to keep alive what they were bred to do and prove that they can still do it in the breed and not deviate as to the reason why they came about..

Yep can see all our Bernese doing a carting course.. lol.. Would be fun though..

Hi all, as far as I understand it, UK is the only European country which is not a FCI member and I am puzzled as to why? Really curious and would be grateful for an explanation. :-)

In most animal fancies, the UK was the first to start registering animals, organise shows, etc, and so in many (or even most) cases the UK has stayed independent. When the FCI was formed long AFTER the KC the KC wasn't going to change their own long established rules and regulations and ways of doing things. Plus until only recently, with the UK having quarantine laws you couldn't come here to show from abroad and we couldn't go abroad to show anyway. The KC was formed in 1873, the FCI in 1911.

I think there are plenty of FCI ways that I like and would like to see within the KC, but likewise there are parts I much prefer the KC way of doing.

Sorry, can't figure our how to quote yet.

"No Jean SW, a dog with a poor temperament would not do well, if shy it would not show, if aggressive it would be dismissed un-judged. OK it may get away with it on one occasion but not for long most judges will not tolerate being threatened or worse by their exhibits."

And that's the main reason I think showing your dog at least once before breeding is a good idea...

UK is the only European country that doesn't require pedigree dogs to be shown at least once in order to qualify for breeding

This is just not true there are loads of pedigree dogs in European countries who have never been near a show ring but are still bred whether intentional or self service.

I believe the British Kennel Club predates the Umbrella organisation that the FCI is.  Also because of Quarantine the UK dog scene was pretty much self sufficient so there was no issue.  The FCI takes the standard of country of Origin or development.

They do recognise other countries titles (unlike AKC in USA) but do not now recognise on their paperwork the FCI International title.  This means they will recognise a dog as a French, Belgian, German etc champion but not Int ch, but are happy for any titles to be used on show entry forms.

Marianne, thank you! That explains  :)

If you don't mind me asking, can you pls clarify which KC practices you like better then the FCI's?

don't you think that a bad temperament would be no good in the show ring anyway?  Surely, it just wouldn't get placed?

Sadly I could tell you many a hair raising story about poor temperaments being given top awards in certain breeds.... :( And many that are so bad that they don't get shown are bred from instead. The FCI system of dogs of certain breeds having to pass a mentality test before being BRED from might help there.

Brainless, thank you!! :)

Nova, ok maybe I was wrong, not all European countries (although I thought so) but at least 6 that I know of require a dog to get a description and a grading from at least one dog show in order to qualify for breeding, otherwise puppies wont get pedigrees even if both parents are registered. 

I just wanted to understand why UK was so different and I got the answers :) 

If you don't mind me asking, can you pls clarify which KC practices you like better then the FCI's?

I'd have to sit down and think carefully to come up with anything comprehensive, but off the top of my head I don't like Champions being shown in their own class so there I prefer the KC way with the Open class. I like the KC Open shows that are more informal and you don't have to spend an entire day at them. I like that you can arrive at a show and not have to go through vetting in as I don't believe the quick FCI vet check does anything to prevent anything anyway -possibly just pass it around more if there was a problem. I like that in the KC, a puppy is a puppy until 12 months of age.

Thanks! :)

but at least 6 that I know of require a dog to get a description and a grading from at least one dog show in order to qualify for breeding, otherwise puppies wont get pedigrees even if both parents are registered.


Registered is different to breeding, you said breeding and I know from the evidence that there is no such ban, I can believe that to register a dog may need to have been shown once but I can not see the point. In the UK some exhibitors will breed on occasion, usually from a successful animal with far more than one appearance to their name. However making it a condition of registering makes a nonsense to the idea of breeding with care and attention to the background of your breeding pair. An experienced breeder may choose to breed from a sibling of a successful show dog for one reason or another and that sibling may be unsuited to showing (it could hate being in a car) but is still carrying the the same genes as the sibling that is a multi CC winner.

In the UK any example of a breed can be registered if its parents are registered and are of the same breed, registration is telling the purchaser that this dog is of the breed and there are records of its ancestry going back for years and in some cases also of the health status of the dog. The dog may not be of show quality, there will be pups in most litters that are not, they will however be carrying the same genes as the show champion from the same litter.

Registration shows the breeder cares enough to let the world know about the litter they have bred, they, in most cases, will add their affix (kennel name) to the pups, the health status of the dam and sire may be shown on the pups papers but pups are a living organism and no one can guarantee that the pup will be show quality, suitable for breeding, or the perfect pet, registration can only show how much care was put into the breeding the rest is up to the  research of the purchaser. IMO adding restrictions to those who are bothered enough to register with the KC does nothing at all to help with the thousands of carelessly bred puppies produced in greed or ignorance.

Just as an aside I wonder how many of our UK registered dogs have gone to show on the mainland of Europe and not won a ribbon, I would be surprise if there are many.

>a sibling of a successful show dog for one reason or another .......... but is still carrying the the same genes as the sibling that is a multi CC winner.

Very similar genes but not identical, and more than your or my genes are exactly the same as those of our brothers or sisters.

Yes, of course, I should have made that clear what I was trying to say was the siblings are carrying the traits of the lines of both parents, was trying to keep the number of words within check. All pup get their share of the available genes and the percentage of them from one or the other parent is in the lap of the gods, a good reason to choose your stud with great care.

Think a lot of people seem to think you mate two champions together and you get a litter of champions and we all know that it does not work like that however the ugly duckling of a litter may well in turn produce a beautiful litter carrying all the best points of the lines they were bred from. They themselves may never win in the show ring but most of their progeny could prove to be winners.

As a matter of interest JG do you see any point in insisting on one visit to the show ring before you are allowed to breed?

Not necessarily the show ring, but I would think independent assessment as to the quality of the animal is essential (we all tend to be biased and think our dogs are the bee's knees!), and the show ring is one of the easiest places to get this. If two or three separate judges either place (or otherwise!) the animal then breeding from it might not be the best thing to do.

In Sweden you pay a fair bit more per pup to register a litter if both parents have not got minimum qualifications from shows or working tests. I like that. Yes some people will get caught out as yes of course at times it's perfectly justified to breed from a bitch that isn't top quality, but it also penalises those that breed just to make money and don't care the slightest about either looks or working ability -this way they make less money if nothing else.

The more I hear about what is done in Sweden and other Scandanavian countries the more I think it makes sense for us to adopt a lot of their measures.
Marianne and Noora to start with have opened my eyes to see that actually we could be doing better over here in the UK in regards to health, temperament and what is required for breeding..
We have to start somewhere and to leave it as it is is doing no one any good, least of all the dogs.

Nova,

Registered pedigree and a champion sibling is not enough evidence that the is good enough to be bred.

The dog hates cars... dogs don't hate things for no reason. Is he afraid of it, nervous, distressed in the car? All of this indicates that the dog is most likely emotionally unstable/weak. Personally I would not want a puppy from a Rottweiler that is nervous of cars...

The dog does not need to win a show to qualify for breeding, it just needs to show up and not to be disqualified for looks or behavior. It's that simple.

Generally, IMHO, if it's too much drama for a dog to show up in a crowded park once in his life and run one circle on a lead and show his teeth, this dog shouldn't be bred....

This one dog show gives an INDEPENDENT overview of the dog and guarantees the buyer that it is not just the breeder's word (who in some cases might be purely financially motivated) that the dog is of good anatomy and temper.

Such things as missing teeth/bad jaw structure, rachitis or herring/break/fracture of the tail will disqualify the dog from the dog show and he won't be bred in those countries where this condition exists.

What stops a breeder from quietly breeding a dog that was born with a fractured tail if no expert has ever seen this dog and all the puppies would be sold to non showing inexperienced pet homes to owners who will probably never realize that the mother and puppy have fractured tails?

And it is not pure esthetics at all. This tiny inherited fracture that just makes the tail have an angle at first sight does not interfere with the dog's life. But tail is the dog's spine and this fracture indicates that the dog has problems with the bone structure and bone joints and will most likely have spinal/bone problems later in life...

Most breeders in my country euthanize newly born puppies with tiny fracture of their tails as they don't want to sell a puppy that already has evidence of future health problems...

If you breed whoever you want without any independent evaluation of the dog, than what's the difference between pedigree and non pedigree puppies? Just that once has a paper and the other one doesn't?  

p.s. I know that responsible breeders won't breed from bad dogs themselves but what about the others and how can the buyer guess if the breeder is responsible if he doesn't understand a thing about dog breeding?
These measures are introduced to give the buyer more guarantee that the dog is anatomically and mentally healthy.
But in the UK at the moment anybody can breed irresponsibly and even get registered pedigrees....

Furthermore, where I am from before the puppies are registered with the kennel club and given pedigrees an "act of confirmation" must be done where a club representative visits the breeder or the breeder takes the puppies to the club representative at 6 week and they are (puppies) evaluated (anatomy and breed characteristics, not looks obviously) and given microchips/tattoos and puppy cards...

Correct me if I am wrong but in the UK you just register your litter online and nobody in the club ever sees the dogs whom they are giving pedigrees too.... Am I wrong?  

There are instances where a dog will b e used for breeding because it is a good dog but the owners have no interest in showing it.

Most of my puppies go to pet homes as do most breeders, many of these Will be top quality. 

Now I could easily end up with the bitch chosen to carry on my liens end up infertile due to pyometra.  I could in this event (assuming the Vets hadn't got there first) persuade an owner of a litter sister to let their bitch have a litter so the lines could be continued.

I may breed a super dog puppy (I can't keep males) that I might want to breed back to further down the line. 

The UK system allows me to use my judgement as to which dogs I can use for breeding provided they are registered.

There is nothing to stop people breeding properly, and compulsion will only ensure the others go elsewhere or do not register at all.  What needs to happen is that people require a higher standard from the breeders they buy from, then those with low standards will be unable to sell their stock, and will have to shape up or ship out.

> These measures are introduced to give the buyer more guarantee that the dog is anatomically and mentally healthy.
> Furthermore, where I am from before the puppies are registered with the kennel club and given pedigrees an "act of confirmation" must be done where a club representative visits the breeder or the breeder takes the puppies to the club representative at 6 week and they are (puppies) evaluated (anatomy and breed characteristics, not looks obviously) and given microchips/tattoos and puppy cards...
>

I dont see the point in this. My pup was a fine, healthy example of his breed when young, it wasn't untill he was 5 months old he showed signs of elbow displasia. A certifacte/confirmation of 'quality' given to him at 6 weeks old would mean nothing now - unless I was an irresponsible person who wished to use that certificate to infer 'quality'.

Of course it does not guarantee that the dog is 100% healthy but it offers some guarantee  + not only some anatomical problems can be picked up, the club can at least check the condition and welfare of puppies before giving tem pedigrees. It is much harder to have a dirty puppy farm with ill treated dogs but with pedigrees if you have to show your bitch on public and go through the "act of confirmation" with the puppies rather than just breed quietly at home and apply for pedigrees online.

Maybe someone can explain to me the difference between kc re and non kc reg puppies in the UK as I can't see it so far...

You can easily have a puppy mill with pedigrees and without... why bother buying a pedigree dog then if the club does not require the breeders to do all of the above and you may as well end up with a badly bred dog?

If I can't rely on the club and my only choice is to find a nice lovely breeder whom I like personally and think is good based purely on my own judgment, I shouldn't be bothered whether her/his dogs are KC registered as there are equal chances for good and bad breeders to be on both sides.

If everyone in the UK is aloud to use their own judgment and choose for themselves whom and how/when they breed, what exactly is the point of the KC and reg?....

>If everyone in the UK is aloud to use their own judgment and choose for themselves whom and how/when they breed, what exactly is the point of the KC and reg?....

Because it allows freedom to keep gene pools as wide as possible.

Good point but without the kc reg you can keep the pool even wider... ;)

And lose breeds entirely, eventually ending up with a generic sandy-coloured, small-to-medium sized dog.

A balance is called for.

Plus I don't see how the FCI rules limit the gene pool.
Under the FCI rules every healthy (both physically/anatomically and mentally) pedigree dog is aloud to be bred within its own breed... so the only option to even further widen the gene pool would be to allow unhealthy or bad tempered dogs into the breeding programme or to crossbreed ...

Define 'unhealthy'. The perfect dog never has been born, nor never will. They all have imperfections. The skill of successful breeding lies in balancing the imperfections of both sire and dam, and their ancestors, so that imperfections aren't doubled up on. The more individuals that are arbitrarily removed the less choice there is.

A KC registration will have the dog's health tests results on it, that has to be a point for registration for a start. And hip scores of course are far more detailed than in other European countries.

Well, you don't need a KC Reg in order to do medical checks on the parents or to sell puppies with medical tests; you can happily sell a non kc reg puppy with eye tests etc...

Anyway, every country is different and clearly does things one way or another cos it believes that this is the best way...

Thanks a lot for all your posts once again, I think I've got all my questions answered.

Well, you don't need a KC Reg in order to do medical checks on the parents or to sell puppies with medical tests; you can happily sell a non kc reg puppy with eye tests etc...

But nobody does. And without the KC reg you can't double check.

In my breed's country of origin, the only health test required is for HD.   In this country, my breed club recommends testing for HD, ED, HC & HUU before puppies will be allowed onto its register.

Likewise in Europe, I see many poor specimens of my breed - although admittedly the same could be said over here - gaining fairly good awards and gradings and probably less than 10 in total being shown at FCI shows.

> Because it allows freedom to keep gene pools as wide as possible.

I would say as nearly as a definite the gene pools in Europe are wider than they are in UK.
Not purely because of the difficulty of bringing in new blood but also because of culture of breeding pedigree animals in UK.

I do feel there should be some limitations on what gets registered and would be happy to see UK KC to implement some things that are done in FCI countries.

Regards the show result...
Many faults that are not major faults will not stop the dog getting for example grading very good(which is often enough to get "breeding rights".
I think somebody posted the descriptions of different grades not long time ago, the limits for breeding really are not there to stop people breeding from "mid quality stock" but to cut out the very tail end of the dogs that should maybe not be bred from anyway.

There definitely is wider scale of quality here in UK in the KC registered dogs than there is in my country of origin and only reason I can see is the fact anybody is free to breed as long as the dog is KC registered.

Also, showing your dog should not just be about winning prizes but making contacts in the breed and watch others of the same breed to know where you are at with your line...or where you wish to go...faults appearing in the breed in general etc...
Of course there are the specialized working dogs and stock but with most breeds, dogs are bred mainly as pets and possibly to show?

Surely anybody wishing to breed should have enough interest in the breed to visit at least few shows to learn a little about what is around...
Of course experienced breeders can grade their own stock but to get that experience, did they not start by going to shows to learn the finer points of the breed?
One way to "encourage" people to go further than breeding their KC reg dog with another KC reg dog is to force them to go that little bit further... Same with health testing...

Another thing that could only do good is in order to get a kennel name in many FCI countries you need to do a course on basics of dog care, genetics etc...
KC is trying to educate those who wish to take the road of breeding dogs to do it well and have at least some basic knowledge before giving them the "stamp" of a kennel name...
Again I suppose something that will differentiate registered dog from a non registered one, surely this should be what KC is there for?

You can of course register without kennel name but if you decide to start breeding more than that single odd litter you will want to have a kennel name and will have to go through little more effort than just thinking of names,filling in a form and cheque.
You will also need to have the breed clubs recommendation... e.g. you will have to have done something(showing,working) with your dogs in order for them to "know" you exist...

Noora, I agree with you on that one!
This is a good practise under FCI, at least there is evidence that when you buy a puppy from a registered kennel, the breeder for sure knows a thing or two about breeding...

Also, when I was choosing my pedigree puppy 11 years ago, I new exactly why I've gone for a pedigree one and not for the unregistered one:

1.  the breeder has some evidence of knowing what he is doing, otherwise he wouldn't be able to register a kennel name
2.  both the bitch and the stud have been shown at least once to an independent expert on a dog show so it is not just the breeder's word that the dogs are fit for breeding and are good examples of their breed.
3.  the puppies have been seen by and independent expert before they were given a pedigree and sold so again, it is not just my own judgment (which I could not trust at that time as I did not know all the details all that well back then) and the breeders word (who was not my close friend or anybody whom I would trust just because I like the person).

Of course, I did not expect any guarantees that the dog will turn out to be a superstar or will never get thick but in this case, I new that this paper (pedigree) actually aims to provide much more guarantee that the dog has all the chances to turn out right and healthy.

In England you don't have any of that so the only difference between buying an unregistered puppy and a KC reg puppy is that one is going to have a paper and other one doesn't.... in both cases when choosing a puppy the only thing you have is your own judgment and hope that you would be lucky enough to come across a good breeder, KC is not helping here at all...

I am much more used to the system where the kennel club takes much more responsibility for the puppies it registers...

>the puppies have been seen by and independent expert before they were given a pedigree and sold

That suggests you could have the ridiculous situation where some puppies from a litter could be registered and some siblings not!

Yes... and that appends in my country and it is actually normal in my view.
I am not sure how its called in English, its sort of a "registry pedigree" or "registry paper"
all the puppies from the litter get registered by the club but those who don't qualify for one reason or another get this "registry document" which means that they are pure bred and shows all the parents and grandparents etc., the puppies are registered by the club and accounted for but don't get a full pedigree which may allow them to be bred from in the future, the rest of the puppies from the litter get normal full pedigrees....

Much simpler and fairer to just endorse all the registrations from the outset, with the option of lifting the endorsements at a later date if the pup grows up to be worthy of breeding from ... oh yes, that rings a bell! ;-)

In England you don't have any of that so the only difference between buying an unregistered puppy and a KC reg puppy is that one is going to have a paper and other one doesn't....

NO; as I said before, one of them will have parents with checkable health history, the other will not! I think that is quite a major difference! Not to mention that one can be shown and the other not, one can have registered puppies, the other not. One might not even be purebred or have a false pedigree, the other will have a verified background.

I think it's about time we turn this thread around to say what we don't like about the FCI system. I'll start off with the Champion class giving cheap Champions abroad.  And what about the hip score grading? An A1 "Excellent" could actually have a score of 4, so WILL have some changes and not be 100% perfect, whereas our scoring system here would differentiate between the minor differences and we'd know that a zero WAS perfect. And an E "Severe" could be anything from 19 to 106, now that I'd say would be a VERY big handicap to any breeder, to not know if the dog has scored 19 or 106.

Oh, and by the way, I think the gene pool in England is so small because every breeder is free to put all sorts of endorsements on their dogs, IMHO.
Although I understand that most of them have to do it cos the UK KC is not doing its job properly and leaves it to the breeders to look after their dogs, but on the negative side it does limit the gene pool dramatically.

This thing doesn't exist in Europe and only the club decides if the dog should get a breeding ban, not the breeder. So everybody who bought a healthy pedigree dog and have met all the necessary requirements (for registering the kennel name and getting breeding permition for their dogs by showing them at least once and doing the medical testes required for the breed) can breed their dog. so no breeder has "his own blood lines" he guards and only breeds from them himself like in England...

>so no breeder has "his own blood lines" he guards and only breeds from them himself like in England...

Eh? Can you explain what you mean please, because that doesn't make sense.

"NO; as I said before, one of them will have parents with checkable health history, the other will not! I think that is quite a major difference! Not to mention that one can be shown and the other not, one can have registered puppies, the other not. One might not even be purebred or have a false pedigree, the other will have a verified background."

Ok, as an example, I have two KC Reg black mini schnauzers (dog and a bitch) but my black mini schnauzer bitch accidentally mates with the neighbour's scotch terrier... the puppies when young would look very similar and it would not be hard for me to sell them to an inexperienced buyer as pure bred black minis.

I then apply for pedigrees on line and claim that my dog schnauzer is the father. KC then gives me pedigrees no questions asked and without seeing the puppies, I sell all the puppies to pet homes and they are never shown....

Since the kennel club never saw the puppies and gave the pedigrees, I just sold KC Reg crossbreeds...