Is there such a thing as a 'KC Approved' breeder? I have seen it a few times on some less than reputable sites and I've always assumed it is the same as an 'assured' breeder, however now I'm a bit more skeptical, is it just someone cleverly using semantics to dupe buyers?

Josh

No such animal, initially the Kennel clubs scheme was called the 'Kennel Club Accredited Breeder' scheme, then changed to 'assured' as they are seeking ACAS Accreditation who didn't approve of the word accredited because it would be confusing with their accreditation or something of that sort.

Right, thought as much! So I take it because pups are registered, they can use the word 'approved KC breeder', which whilst it means nothing, won't get them into hot water legally?

Well, the registration of pups does not suggest or give approval to the breeder or the breeding. If it could make the basis of a court case I don't know but would think not. Do feel there is loads of ambiguity with the AB system and it does need sorting not just that it is being abused but in truth it says very little about the breeder who is entitled to use the title, personally I think the criteria for acceptance should be much higher on the experience and knowledge side and less airy fairy in the tick the box system.

> I think the criteria for acceptance should be much higher on the experience and knowledge side

I think we want to encourage people to breed to these standards straight from the off.

Having a two tier system is untenable, to KC reg puppies all breeders should adhere to ABS standards and the KC will just have to swallow the drop in revenue from the ones not willing o adhere.

People like Puppy farmers and back yard breeders are already using mickey mouse registries, so if KC don't accept them, then at least there would e a clear cut distinction between KC reg meaning at the very least health testing and minimum standards, and the rest.

Considering that the cost of puppy vaccinations around here is approaching £60, even if the KC reg fees per puppy were doubled decent breeders would accept it, to show they were real breeders, the ones in it purely to produce puppies for sale could go to the mickey mouse brigade where it's cheaper and means nothing.

Untenable?  Well, it's been running for some time now and has continued to grow with more and more breeders adopting these higher standards of breeding.

Untenable?  Well, it's been running for some time now and has continued to grow with more and more breeders adopting these higher standards of breeding.

I admire you faith, just how many have had a visit and perhaps more to the point how many have had two, as those that do take place are announced I can't see that the system is producing much of an improvement in the standards of breeding. Anyone can agree to anything and hope not to get caught out and what happens if you are, I think the present system lacks teeth and there and any number of people just using it without having any intention of improving their breeding practice they will still be producing designer dogs who will be sold under the ABS label.

> I can't see that the system is producing much of an improvement in the standards of breeding.

How do you know, have you been on any of the inspections? :)
Inspections are happening and some breeders have been removed from the scheme so there does appear to be teeth.  There is also the purchaser feed back.  Another aspect of the scheme is that it helps educate those people in just what they should be expecting from a good breeder.

Getting back more on the track of the original question, I have also seen sites wiht breeders advertising themselves as "Kennel Club Affiliate Breeders" which I presume means they are affiliate members, but what that has to do with their breeding status goodness knows!

How do you know, have you been on any of the inspections?

That was my point Stooge, how do you know.

Have statistics been published, I think some percentages have been released but from what I remember they were not that impressive.

Yes you are right Gwen, lets get back to the question, I have seen all sorts of claims with all sorts of words used to make the up the letters ABS but doubt that any are actually members of the ABS because if they were they would know what to call themselves.

Anyone can agree to anything and hope not to get caught out and what happens if you are,

You WILL get caught out the instant you try to register a litter were both parents don't fulfil the criteria -surely that is what matters more than anything else.

they will still be producing designer dogs who will be sold under the ABS label.

Seeing as this isn't allowed (using your AB status in connection with crossbreeds), anyone who DOESN'T' report such a case is as guilty as the person doing it.

Could be wrong Goldmali but not registering all your litter does not preclude you from being a member of the AB scheme therefore you can call yourself a member and in fact be a member but still produce unregistered litters and designer breed type crosses.

What I meant what is untenable to have breeders able to register (no health testing etc) who didn't adhere to at least the ABS standards. 

The ABS standards should be the basic requirement for KC registration, not an add on.

>The ABS standards should be the basic requirement for KC registration,

When the scheme was first introduced the KC explained that they felt it had to be done by persuasion as they do not have a monopoly on registration or indeed breeding without registration.  No doubt they hope, like the rest of us, that one day all breeding will be carried out to at least that standard but in the meantime their approach appears to be achieving a steady improvement by increasing the numbers pledging to breed to these standards.

Thank you for all your clarification on the matter! As I thought, I think the litter is a BYB one.

All of this aside, I do feel that this two-tier KC system (Simply KC registered pups and KC Assured breeders) should be made into simple registration which would signify that the health testing standards had been done. What it REALLY needs is some sort of prime-time television advert and radio airtime scheduled around Christmas (What I assume to be prime breeding time for BYBs)

I really do think the main problem is with people buying non-tested pups comes down to education and that they think all of these tests and checking if parents have been shown etc are just for you 'breeders' and 'show dogs.' At the end of the day, in an ideal world, the buyers would do all the research that they should be doing. However we all know that is not going to happen! However, if the facts were presented to them in a way that appeal to them. (Did you know your new puppy could cost X amount in vet bills by the time it is aged 5 if the parents aren't tested for X/Y/Z?)

All the Mickey Mouse registrars would be able to do what they want, but I still think a LOT of ignorant people think that a KC registered dog is a healthy dog.

>I still think a LOT of ignorant people think that a KC registered dog is a healthy dog.

I think a lot of people think a KC registered dog has to be a show dog, and if you're not interested in showing you buy a non-registered one.

I think a lot of people think a KC registered dog has to be a show dog, and if you're not interested in showing you buy a non-registered one.

Oh yes! If you look at my very first post on here (How times have changed!) I was looking for a tibetan terrier breeder (and somehow, somewhere along the line I decided I wanted a German Shepherd instead) and I think my exact words were 'I'm not too concerned whether or not it is KC registered, (s)he will be neutered/spayed and I've no intention of showing.

Cringe.