Moonmaiden, there is no insistence on tattoo or chip numbers for KC/BVA scheme either, so nothing to stop the unscrupulous submitting the same dog under multiple names there either, for hips or eyes ...... :(

Yes, they may record chip/tattoo numbers if they're available - but they can't insist on it.

Marina

Whatever the rights or wrongs there is nothing in the rules of the BVA/ISDS scheme demanding either tattooing or chipping. If the dog has been done then it can be listed otherwise it will be tested and recorded in the BRS in exactly the same manner. Some people, myself included are not in favour of microchipping. I've seen far to many move, new ones as well as old and until they get that sorted I would rather not have one inside my dogs. The KC has been talking compoulsory identification for a number of years now but even the vet profession cannot agree on the use of chips.

Best wishes, John

Hi Moonmaiden, if you take an unregistered dog under the scheme for a test, and state at the time it is unregistered, then in my exprience you get a certificate, but of course it does not appear in a BRS.  It is only if you take a registered dog, but do not have the KC reg. cert. with you that no results are given till you send the cert in to the vet.  So your actual certificate is as valid as any registered dog, to show the puppy buyers.  At all the eye testings I have attended, no-one has ever asked if the dogs were chippped, so no attempt was ever made to read and identify them by chip.

I am certain of the facts on the unreg. dog details, as one of my Yankees is not registered.  He was a singleton pup, and has always been just my pet, never a possibilty as a show or stud dog.  He was accidentally not reg due to a KC slip up with the paperwork, which was returned to me  as I had made a mistake, but went missing in the post. I  did not realise I hadnt got his reg until he was way over a year old, and I saw no reason in then paying the £50 laste reg fee, as he was mine anyway.  However, becausee I bred him and his mum, and have cousins and their offspring, he gets eye tested each year along with the rest of the bunch, and always comes home with his certificate.

Even if the results are not available for the wider benefit of the breed from these type of testings, at least the owners have the benefit of the information for their own breeding programme, and are at liberty to make it known in thier wider circle if they want to.  I cant grasp the concept of criticising someone from actually carrying out voluntary testing, I think it should be applauded!
bye
Gwen

The Irish Kennel Club accept the little JR's.
They have also several evaluation days for those not registered with the IKC.
So if they pass they go on to an interim register for the breed.

Its still legal to work terriers on fox underground, a very tough job for a dog indeed! I'm not a terrier person (although I own a short legged JR) but know a few owners. Some get very touchy about describing hunting rats and rabbits as 'work' for a terrier.

A 'working' JR that would only hunt rats and rabbits would be very much considered a failure by many in the working terrier world. Pretty much any terrier will hunt rats and rabbits, but the failure rate on fox is much higher, so I could understand a breeder wanting to keep a few back if they had this in mind.

Showing non-KC reg working terriers is quite a popular hobby and in terms of numbers is probably more competitive than showing many KC reg breeds. I'm not sure where short-legged JRs would be shown successfully in the UK, as the show winners i have seen have still tended more toward the parson "type". However, I understand that this is not necesarily the case in other countries. (It is a while since I have attended a working terrier show, so perhaps short-legged russels are winning now?)

Just a thought - and we have wandered WAY off the original subject here!  One of the main differences between the KC/BVA scheme and the European scheme is that the European schemes insists on permenant ID (chip or tattoo).  This is why there has been a problem with Europoean testing in the UK not being up to the required standard, the ID has not been compulsory.
bye
Gwen

Well Gwen it was at Crufts this yeasr, but they did offer to chip the dog for free before testing-the KC trying to get the chip accepted as the norm & only acceptable form of ID

I still think that testing without Tattoo or Chip is not relly the way to go as the same dog could go through time & again like a GSD once did for HD scoring