This is on the front of this weeks dog world, suprisingly enough there is no comment from the KC :rolleyes:

Well, what an incentive to join the KC Accredited Breeder Scheme :(  - really why bother paying for accreditation when any puppy farmer can do the same and nothing done about it?    Used to be the KC commanded some respect at least, but now??   And the RSPCA, how do they square this with good animal care?  Its a joke from start to finish  :( :(

I haven't seen anything to suggest this breeder is part of the Accredited Breeder scheme that is not the same as the KC accepted registration of the puppies.  My understanding is that the KC is unable in law to discriminate against large number breeders as that in itself is not against the law, hence the Accredited scheme is an attempt to seperate them from the more responsible breeder.

How do you know that these puppies were KC registered. Labs are popular as pets and most pet buyers are not interested whether a puppy is KC registered or not. Saves money if they're not registered.

Her puppies always used to be registered Sheena. I have a number of old Breed Record Supliments with them in. There can be no excuses, the KC must have known. Several years before this came out I had her marked down as a puppy farmer and if I could see it with only a limited number of BRS then the KC could not fail to know. 60 to 80 puppies registered in a quarter, and that was six years ago!

Regards, John

From reading the Lab breed notes in the dog press this week, it would seem that in the last year or two, she hasn't been registering her pups.

M.

I know the KC hasn't had any registrations from this breeder for some time. I wonder if she is not registering or even registering with the Dog Lovers scheme. Having said that I wouldn't know how to find the Dog lovers scheme anyway.

If she isn't registering the ones she has breed then will she register the ones she has still got? How can she tell which dog is which and match it to it's pedigree?

Another thought, with regard to health checks prior to breeding, taking the eye testing for example, assuming she gets the specialist to travel to her kennels and has more than 25 at a time eye tested, the bill for one year alone will be £1507-00 for 110 dogs! To cover that cost she would have to breed and sell an awful lot of puppies, so I think we can safely take it none are health checked.

Will the RSPCA check these dogs prior to rehoming? Or do they have a "sold as seen" policy? so that new owners will be picking up vets bills for problems not easily detectable? My friend rehomed a golden retriever, shortly after she had it, it nipped her son. Wondering how this could have happened as we were both there, Sue decided to have the dogs eyes checked, it was found that the dog had a small cataract on that eye, the dog did not see so well and her son moving quickly past the dog, had taken it by surprise. After that both children and dog settled in really well and no further problem occurred. When either of the children invited their friends round they explained that Purdey had a "poorly eye and to make her aware, they were there"

OK, whether she registers now or not:-

Breed Record Supplement (Y03/2) Autumn 1998 Volume CXIX No1322
This woman registered 9 litters totalling 76 puppies from 4 sires.

There is also another affix in the same BRS registering 7 litters with all sires bearing that breeders affix. Yet another with 6 litters in that same quarter all 6 sired by the same dog.

And another breeder with 10, yes 10 litters registered in a quarter, 80 puppies from 2 stud dogs!!!!!

To me all these people, by virtue of the number of puppies bred are puppy farmers! This is rank over breeding in my book and the KC, by registering them is condoning it. They are all there in black and white for anyone to see.

Regards, John

Frightening but sadly true, these figures are not unusual. I agree anyone breeding that number of puppies is puppy farming no matter how well cared for the dogs are.

<<Frightening but sadly true, these figures are not unusual.>>

No Polly. In the same issue of the BRS there was NO Flatcoat affix holders with more than one litter and even in Goldens the maximum was 2 affix holders with three litters.

The true statement would appear to be, "It happens all the time in Labradors!" It is the breed I love which is being destroyed by the very worst of the puppy farming.

Regards, John

Sadly John its my beloved breed too and worse still Im in rescue we need some accurate rescue figures done someone to contact all breed rescues and produce some figures I would be happy to cooperate then send them the KC but it still wouldnt make any difference
breed rescues offered to help RSPCA with these dogs and were told they would consider them as anyone else who offered a home its farcical

This whole affair does not reflect well on either the RSPCA or the KC. We have long run down the Doglovers Registeration but I question whether there is much difference! It appears to me that the KC will register just about anything for a fee!

Regards, John

Yes John and Mattie, I agree with both your comments, the KC with register a litter of puppies by anyone, even in childrens names, in fact I took issue with them over this a number of years ago when they were registering litters of puppies in the name of a known puppy farmer using his childrens names too. One of the children was 11 years old, the KC did not have problem with this at all.

I think the KC has lost its way on the issue of registration, the general public who are looking to purchase a puppy on the whole do not feel that it has too much importance, feeling that they are paying extra for a puppy to have KC registeration, when one without will suffice as they only want a pet. I know they are missing the point in as much that a puppy with KC reg was supposed to represent a healthy pedigree puppy, well bred etc.   For many breeders I know this still applies,   unfortunately as the KC will reg any breeders puppies regardless of breeding standards, this does make a mockery of what KC reg was supposed to represent to a person purchasing a puppy. This is why other registration clubs are flourishing they are being used extensively more and more and more by the puppy farmers, (cheaper too) selling puppies to retail outlets.  The general public do not seem to mind one piece of paper with names on is to some people the same as another.  In the past puppy farmers used the KC, some still do but not nearly as many, or they use both simultaniously to enable them to breed each season without the KC detecting what they are doing.
I cannot understand how this breeder allowed herself to get in this situation to have so many puppies and young dogs under 1 year old all together - was she breeding for a contract to supply, maybe to export and then lost the contract, leaving her in this situation?  Why has the Council for not prosecuting for unlicensed breeding?
Does anyone know why OUR DOGS have not mentioned one word about this, when DOG WORLD had this article on the front page? Just curious, has she given an interview or comment, all seems a little hush hush regarding the breeeder, apart from BIG publicity for the RSPCA, is this to take the heat off this breeder by distracting the publics attention to the dogs and RSPCA and away from her activities. I think the last case of large numbers of dogs being held in one place in the UK was the Thomas in Wales and Helen Hein in Surrey, different situation I know but still excessive amounts of dogs and puppies - there can be no excuse for any of them.  

The Kennel Club is trying to promote the serious breeders who do everything to make sure their puppies and the owners are supported, which is why the introduced the Accredited breeders scheme. If you look on the KC site it will have the rules breeders are expected to abide by listed there. This includes having all health checks and providing diet sheets etc.. The  breeder is also required to follow up each puppy and keep in contact.

I can see that the position of the Kennel Club is a difficult one. On the one hand it can monitor who is breeding what and how many, if it does not restrict registrations in any way, but if it restricts access these people set up their registration systems and then nobody knows what is going on. As it is the Kennel Club is losing registrations due to introducing a code of ethics and restricting how often a litter from a bitch can be registered, and also by printing BVA results on registrations, also it is more expensive to register with the KC, therefore it is only the breeders such as those of us here who will soon be using the KC, while less creditable registration systems flourish. In a way these registration systems being so devisive could lead to a there being only one body with any authority that would be the RSPCA! I know I wouldn't want that.

As to Our Dogs not having the story in this weeks paper, I do know they have held it over because of some information they have obtained which has not so far been issued anywhere else. Had they published last week the information would not have been ready, and they do plan an indepth article on this. 

The problem with the Accredited Breeders scheme is that it makes absolutely no mention of the BAER test - one of the most vital health tests in dalmatians, English setters, bull terriers, border collies, aussies ... :rolleyes: All the rest is basic good husbandry that breed clubs recommend. So forget the AB scheme and go with what Breed Clubs recommend, because they are stricter ...

Breed clubs should be stricter and most are thankgoodness. If the accredited breeder scheme is to work and over time improve, then it needs the good breeders to support it from the begining, rather than knock it for what it currently lacks. I am sure had it been introduced with much stricter rules there would have been an equally loud protest from many that it was too strict.
The Kennel Club are going to listen to those breeders who use the scheme when they decide to improve it, so if responsible breeders don't join it however imperfect it might be, then they won't be asked and perhaps should not have the right to comment on it when changes are up for discussion.

Is the KC Profit making or a Non Profit making organisation do you know ?

Lucy
xx

The KC publish a report on their financial dealings every year.