Been musing over the KC statement that they may consider registering Labradoodles, Cockerpoos and other F1  crosses - does this mean that breeds that are currently unrecognised like the Klee Klai, The English Shepherd  the Silken Windhound and the Swiss White Shepherd will also now be eligible for registration ? ...and what about all those wolf look alike type of dogs will they also be registering the Utonagon, the Tamaskan or the Northern Inuit ? ...after all these are breeds that are way beyond the first generation cross that the average Puggle or Cavashon breeder is producing  ...and what about all those hundreds of currently unrecognised continental breeds - will they register the Mudi or the Porcelaine ? ...these and many hundreds of other breeds are well established in their own countries but currently unrecognised , surely this would need to change ?

I really don't think the KC have thought this one through !!.

YVonne

I don't see why they need to register them. They can't be shown, and if their owners want to compete in other activities then there's already the activity register.

They smell the money, withhthe crossbreeds being so popular just think of all those registration fees they will get.

After seeing a number of dogs of the wolf breed types with severe eye, heart and hip problems and the way that none of them seem to agree on what they want with these crosses I wouldn't be happy them being KC registered until their breeders come to some kind of understanding with each other. 

I do feel that the KC are after getting even more money rather than really caring about breeds.

But that's my point ...if the KC register crossbreeds then they clearly will not care if breeders " have some kind of an understanding with each other " a trifling thing like a breed standard will not be important when weighed against the opportunity to make money by jumping on the designer dog band wagon !!!

Yvonne

Agree with everyone, it is all about the money.

I don't understand what the difference will be you already have people registering dogs and litters on the Activity register. 

I think all the KC is considering is having such breeders able to show they are breeding to certain standards re health testing and care.

They are nto adding them to the breed register.

>I think all the KC is considering is having such breeders able to show they are breeding to certain standards re health testing and care.

I agree; and all dogs, whatever their parentage, deserve the best possible start in life.

Currently KC registration is not linked to health testing therefore so I cannot see how registering cross breeds  will have any impact on their health or the way they are bred.

Allowing designer cross breeders to join the ABS is different , this WOULD raise their game, but KC registering them  What would this achieve ????

Yvonne

I'm with you on this one Yvonne

Maybe they will have a seperate cross breed register and those that want to join the ABS will have to register on that prior to joining.

It would make them loads of money.....

Seems pointless as there are two registers they already can use the 'Activities' and 'Companion' dog registers.

Any of the cross breed breeders if they wanted could use these registries already, but I suspect most don't bother, why spend the money.

> Maybe they will have a seperate cross breed register and those that want to join the ABS will have to register on that prior to joining.

Wondering about that myself, the breeders are using the Activity register to register them on, which isn't what it's meant to be for, so a separate Cross Breeds register would fill that gap, with the possibility of adding health tests. I don't think this fad for oodles and doodles is going to go away so at least it provides a means of recording ancestry and health data, if people are going to continue buying them.

I may be wrong but I don't think the Activity register publishes results of health tests? And is it searchable, for ancestry details and COI, in the same way the breed register is?

I may be wrong but I don't think the Activity register publishes results of health tests? And is it searchable, for ancestry details and COI, in the same way the breed register is?

Health test results are published in the BRS for the activity register, just as for other breeds. However it is notably few I'd say! I've only once had an activity registered dog, years and years ago, and I just typed her  name into the health test results finder and that worked, she was found. Obviously though as dogs on the activity register aren't on the breed register and can be any breed there cannot be a COI.

Oh and it just occurred to me to check my accidental crossbreeds born 11 years ago. I knew the registered activity reg name for one (did not reg them myself, but a couple of owners did in order to compete in obedience) so typed his name in, and indeed that showed both his parents' hip scores despite them being of two different breeds.

..but what is the point of recording ancestors and health data if the dogs are never going to be bred on from ? ....most designer dogs are F1 which means they are the direct result of mating two pedigrees together and those pedigree dogs ( i.e Labradors and Poodles ) can already be KC registered- surely  lineage or health data is only of use if those first generation crosses are subsequently passing their genes on ...if not then what on earth is the point ?

Yvonne

The driving force for the breeding of utonagons Tamaskan and NIs are the owners egos. Whoever can breed the most wolf like looking and behaving dog wins. Then they use their dominance theories to get the dogs to submit whilst everyone around them oohs and aahs. GSD fraternity included for reasons being that there is GSD mixed in there somewhere. The husky and malamute rescues have a huge problem with the wolf craze but for these to gain more popularity and with a more unstable temperament and risky lineage, is daft. I for one would be happy for the barbet to be recognised and have done with doodles.