Just been discussing the new breed supplements with a Labrador friend. We have a person in the local area (North West) who has 7 litters in this quarters breed supplement. Two of the bitches have had the litters 7 months since their last litters and four of the bitches within 6 months of their last litters. Now if this isn't puppy farming then what is. All dogs are hip scored and eye tested so technically he is doing the 'right thing', however I feel in my heart of hearts that the Kennel Club should not be registering these litters. He normally has litters in every breed supplement. He runs a trailer business from the premises so he has the dogs registered in his wife's name (tax purposes?). He has been investigated by the RSPCA and has had better kennels built (well after all he can afford it with so many litters being sold) and he uses his own dogs (so no stud fees there). None of the dogs are shown and I have heard he is extremely aggressive to anyone that challenges him. My friend is telephoning the KC tomorrow to ask the question but my heart is sinking already as I believe that the response she is going to get won't really put the situation right. Why oh why does the KC not take a bit more care when registering these puppies, after all, the evidence is all there.

Surely this quantity of litters would require them to be licensed by their council though - and licensed breeders are still not permitted to register litters from a bitch on consecutive seasons?

Or am I getting confused with the constantly changing regulations?

M.

As I understand from talking at the KC stand at Crufts, the KC will register pups from consecutive litters. The only way they will stop the registration of a particular litter is if someone makes a complaint about the breeder and dam

Yes that is OK for breeders that are not required to be registered, but theri own computer suystem shoudl flag up if a breeder is trying to register a fifth litter in any 12 month, if not then it should, such breeders cannot by law breed on consecutive seasons.

These people are breaking the law and need reporting. 

Under the current law anyone breeding five or more litters in any 12 month period has to be licensed and licensed breeders may not take a litter from a bitch in under 12 months from her last litter.

There are laws in place so they need implementing.

This is not so much a matter for the Kennel club which is a private organisation, but for the authorities.

I suggest the breed club informs the authorities that they expect the law to be implemented and provide the evidence in the form of the BRS records.  I think a club doing the informing will carry more weight than an individual as then it cannot be seen as malicious complaint.

The fact they are registered actually gives more evidence for the authorities to prosecute under the law.

Thanks for that Barbara. I do believe this man most probably is a licensed breeder but I was very unsure as to the 'Code of Conduct' about breeding from a bitch under 12 months between litters. I know the breed clubs have this in force but was unsure about the licensing authorities. I was actually going to telephone them myself tomorrow to ask the question but now instead I can inform my friend and she can take it to the breed club committee.
I ask you, do they need any more Labradors being bred than are already being born.
In fact, talking to one lady who came over to me and my mob one day who has a Labrador from him, she has never had the KC papers yet (3 years old now) and when she continued asking for them he asked her to tell him the name of the mother and then he could find out which were her papers I have to presume from this that he probably breeds more litters than he actually registers. I still believe that the KC should be asking questions, after all, if he puts them on their puppy list then people automatically think that it is a KC recommendation.

According to the kennel club the puppy list is only for those who breed less than five litters a year.

Also they do ask if you are a registered breeder so surely should not be registering a second litter in 12 months, unless of course he ticks no and no-one checks to see if he has registered five litters already n a 12 month.

I assumed the reason for the question was so the KC could inform the authorities or refuse to register a second litter?

Maybe a word to the Inland Revenue might be a good idea too.

Thats one of the things on the agenda.

i think the kc should definitly be taking more care i was once speaking to someone who knew of someone who managed to put his puppys as a kc reg when in fact it was not even a full breed dog he had used.

He would have had to use a genuinely registered dog's number to get it on the computer system.  The Kennel Club cannot possibly know if that has been done fraudulently unless someone lets them know.  I wonder, though, if he is confused by the activities register where the dogs do not have to be pure bred.

A letter to the KC should also be prepared, I suppose in reality they can't check every litter and I wonder how it would flash up to warn them on the computer?   Maybe their computer system needs updating????

Can you be more specific with area?

i cant remembe what he told me the lad had told him how he did it ( it was a while back) but he said he had told him and that it was easy to register dogs that are not pure bred as pure bred, will ask my partner about it see if he can remember what he said.

I thought only 1 litter every 12 months could be registered from the same bitch??

That's only for licensed breeders i.e. those that breed more than 5 litters a year.

I am waiting to talk to my friend who was contacting the KC today and see what they say on the matter. I will also be contacting the Inland Revenue to see how they feel on the matter as the wife is the registered owner.

You need to contact the enviroment dept at your local council. usually they are quite hot on dog breeding. Its up to them re licenced kennels, dog breeding etc. Even if he breeds only 4 litters a year, if he is making money out of it they may require him to become licenced.

The problem is that he is licensed, but it doesn't make it right to breed from these bitches season after season. Having checked the breed supplements one bitch had her litter 5 months after her last litter! I am not letting this go. yet again I say surely the Kennel Club should be very concerned about this. My friend has phoned the Kennel Club and they say they will look into it and get back. I think the best thing is to bombard them with letters and see how that goes if they don't come back with an answer.

The KC dont care as long as they are making money I hassled them for nearly two years as Abbys breeder bred from her mum every season and they werent interested, she had about 60 puppies in total and suddenly stopped breeding dont know what happened. I explained to the KC that she wasnt breeding healthy puppies Abby had a heart condition, pancres that didnt work properly, was allergic to lots of different things and had a thyroid problem how many of her other puppies had something wrong with them but no one cared. I know all the puppies werent ill as I know Abbys sister lives in France at the moment as if fit and healthy. Best bet is Inland revenue, local dog warden(they will know who you are best to phone) and benefits office if you think they claim anything.
Mary

We at Lab rescue know this man, he has been investigated many times but to no avail,yes he is in fact a puppy farmer but unless you can get proper evidence maybe photos where can you go...we are up against this all the time our rescue has had 48 labs in just july alone and August is doing no better..

I was shocked to see how many Labs were being registered when we got the BRS for Treacle's change of ownership. this was the first time I had paid any attention to it as all our previous dogs had been Working breeds. There were thousands being registered and that was just in one BRS. How can these people possibly be finding suitable homes for all these dogs, last year over 45000 labrador retrievers were registered and the poor folk in rescue get left to pick up the pieces.

Edited to say: i just checked again and there were more labs registered than the group total for any other group in the year, the largest group registrations after Gundogs was Terriers and that was just over 43000, so 2000 more labs were registered than all the terriers put together . Does that shock anyone else or is it just me?

Maybe we should all write to the KC or at least a petition?

Well if he is licensed then he is breaking the law by allowing a bitch to whelp in  less than 12 months from a previous litter, KC registration is irrelevant but proves that he has done so.

Evidence provided to the council will enable them to prosecute him and possibly revoke his license.

Also to get around people having littwers in  different names the figure of five or more litters bred b7y the same person or at same address or family member applies.

Has been known also for a breeder to register a pup that doesn't exist and use both kC documents to breed from the same bitch but under different registrations. One was picked up by a veterinary opthalmologist and reported to the KC, they did nothing at all.
These people are very crafty, one GR breeder who had 5 litters advertised last year  plus 2 xbreeds got round this by only registering 2 litters 5 months later after they were born so she only had 3 litters  registered with the KC within the 12 month period, . It seems the genuine people that make a mistake get targeted but those who blatantly abuse these defencless trusting animals get away scot free. The general public are fooled by cute photos, sickly sweet websites etc and will fall prey to these nasty individuals. Makes me so cross and brings me to tears of frustration at times.

KC registration is irrelevant

It might be irrelevant to the law he is breaking but we are back again to this idea that the KC confer legitimacy on these breeders because people, rightly or wrongly, assume that if a litter is KC registered then the breeder must therefore be OK. The average pet owner has no idea that as long as the parents are registered ANY offspring can be registered whether or not the breeder has followed breed club rules re testing etc or not.

About time the KC did a national campaign to alert people  and advise them , asking too much though. Maybe we should go down the German route where all dogs have to have the relevant health screening passes and pass a temp test before they will register any litter.  Also a pup from the litter is DNA tested to ensure that it is from said parents.

All for that.  In many countries a KC rep comes and has a look at the litter to see they look typical before they can be registered.  I think these are in countries where far fewer pedigree dogs are registered.

I was in Poland when someone I knew had a visit from their local KC rep and they even note any unusual markings or faults such as hernias on the paperwork, and the pups have to be id'd by chip or tattoo.

It would stop some of these people in their tracks to be sure but I doubt the KC would spend their coffers on it. They have loads of AC breeders registered now and only one person to visit them, just a pr excercise for them.

I think it is a very good idea, it seems then that it's not only Germany and Sweden that do it then. Why don't the KC follow by example I wonder?

>Why don't the KC follow by example I wonder?

Because unless you have some legal control over the breeding of puppies as well you will just have people breeding without bothering with the Kennel Club. The demand for puppies will not go away.  At least while registration remains desirable the KC have some influence over breeding practices.
How do you know one Breeder Advisor is not sufficient?  Unless you know how many puppy purchasers are reporting concerns how can you say that is not sufficient.  The KC has so far continued to evolve the scheme in response to various criticisms including the appointment of the Advisor so it seems quite likely if he is not able to meet demand they will expand that department.  He has also been appointed to do random checks so that should keep people on their toes.

Other countries seems to manage it, Germany etc, not beyond the wit of man or the KC. Maybe the demand for puppies  that are ill bred or mongrels would go away if the KC or government did something about the KC's registration process, the public were better educated etc but oh I must be living in fairy land to think such things, back to the real world

>He has also been appointed to do random checks so that should keep people on their toes.

Unless there has been a recent change to this, as published on the KC site the Advisor has to give 'reasonable notice' and does not perform random visits.

M.

Exactly, so it has no real teeth, and one person cannot possibly cover the whole country. What about their sick leave, holiday leave, days off. If someone dodgy is reported, and the KC make an appointment to visit, its very easy to shift dogs out, or to 'clean up and paint' so that the premises look wonderful.
if other countries have systems in place to check breeders, why can't we. the unreg trade will never stop, but it would make a KC reg more desirable, and make this mean something. Really there is no need for the AB scheme, ALL dogs should be bred and produced and sold in the way the AB scheme rules, that is after all what most people think they are already getting by buying a KC reg puppy. Decent breeders do all that is required anyway. By giving a double standard the Kc are simply admitting that they allow puppy farmers, and over producers to reg their puppies. it would be so simple to DNA all breeding stock, and then the puppies produced, to enable the link between parents and puppies to be made, and have a vet count and certify to the number of puppies in the litter, to be sent to the Kc with the litter reg. If a breeder is licenced, the KC should abide by the dog breeding law and not register puppies born that fail this law, and furthur more they should report the over production to the local council. The Kc have the PC system to be able to hit puppy farming at source, but it would appear they don't, and are actually assisting the puppy farmers, or those that are flouting the law by breeding in a way that is illegal to the act. if they were a responsible organisation, they would not wait for a complaint, they would adere to the law at source, that being when the litter application is received. its all so simple really.

>Unless there has been a recent change to this, as published on the KC site the Advisor has to give 'reasonable notice' and does not perform random visits.

Quote from the recent KC letter to affix holders

>we appointed a Breeder Advisor, who makes random visits and selected visits.

It appears he is authorised to do both.

Have just spoken to the AC breeders department and Brainless is correct, the officer cannot turn up without a prior appointment that must be made in writing first. Again what is the point of that!!!! as B says a lick of paint and a few dogs gone all is hunky dory.

I have it in writing in front of me but maybe they have changed their policy again! They still have the fall back of feedback that they encourage from purchasers.  It may be difficult to swiftly alter things and hoodwink the inspector if this does not tally with what more than one feedback form is telling him and I am sure he will soon become experienced in spotting the tell tale signs of a hasty clean up and fresh paint :)

I hope that all people that purchase a pup from a KC AB take the time to fill in the questionairre, it's difficult enough to get some of them to change the registration into their own names. I was shocked at how many dogs I have in my name when I checked online litter page, one litter not one person had changed the reg even though I advise them of how important it is.

Yes, but you know how it is, if people have something negative to say they are far more likely to fill a questionaire in :)  These will also often be people that went to the trouble of seeking out Accredited Breeders so it seems to me they will looking for the standards to justify their efforts.

Never a truer word spoken Do the KC advise the AB's that the forms have been returned obviously without the comments? Just curious as if not a lot fill them in it may be that the breeder doesn't give them out? Catch 22 but I suppose you could always ring to check how many have been returned

A feedback form is included in the Puppy Sales Wallet.  I suppose the breeder could take them out but he/she would be running quite a high risk that this would become apparent if the purchaser complained to the KC anyway.  They would also be breaking one of the schemes requirements that they make the purchaser aware of the complaints procedure.

Not all AB give the form :rolleyes:  Yes, I know that they are supposed to but if you are doing things that are not quite right you're not going to are you?

Have noticed that in the Gazzette they have published a list of AC breeders with their accolades. What suprises me is the number of people that do not have any accolades at all. Surely to make the AC scheme work they must really set down specific levels for people to fulfill before they allow them status, even basics such a breed club membership and experience:rolleyes:

If only.

Yes there are specific levels, Floradora, there are 11 specific requirements for anyone joining the scheme but the Accolades, denoting experience, club membership etc, were introduced, as a response to feedback, to differentiate those that fulfill even more than that.  The way I see it, you now have a scheme that enables people to advance and therefore encourage even higher standards. The KC have stated that they don't want to exclude people without experience because they want to encourage the specific requirements being adopted right at the start of their breedering career.

Not thought of it that way, brain gone to mush with having 2 kids at home I think. Logically you are right, I hope the ones that have joined take up the breed club membership to gain their first accolade. I know when I joined the ACb a lot of breeders I know in the circle of GR were up in arms about it and I took rather a lot of stick. At the end of the day whatever we do we are not going to be able to stop someone somewhere flouting the law as I have found out  with a gr breeder who knows all of the tricks to stop being registered with the local council. Just makes me so mad but hey ho summer is here!!

It seems to me the KC are putting in many levels.
level One.

Anyone with a KC reg dog and bitch of the same breed can register a litter. regardless of how many litters a year they breed, only restrictions are to age of bitch and quantity of litters, and not allowed to advertise on puppy register if more than 4 litters in a 12 mth period. Not bothered if licenced breeders or not. This could be called the Puppy Farm litters. (appolgies to those who are not AB's and breed well)

level 2

ABs, who can fill in forms and get round the system by taking some health checks and identifying stock, with only limited control by potential visits which are by appointment only. can advertise on puppy register for free even if they breed more than 4 litters a year. Should be higher standard of breeder, but the good ones in level 1 do this anyway.

Level 3

trying to get better than the level 1 and 2, or maybe trying to make the AB scheme mean something. Showing experience, club membership etc. Many of level 1 do this anyway.

I thought the higher standards were what level 1 did anyway, if responsible breeders. How can a responsible organisation have any type of tiered syatem? if KC reg is to actually mean something, then there should be no need for 'levels' all the dogs registered should be from the same type of breeder, by giving levels the KC are simply accepting they allow puppy farmers to register their puppies. The question could well be asked, why do they allow substandard breeders to register at all? And why do they allow those that are flouting the law regarding amount of litters produced to register their puppies?

It may be difficult to swiftly alter things and hoodwink the inspector if this does not tally with what more than one feedback form is telling him and I am sure he will soon become experienced in spotting the tell tale signs of a hasty clean up and fresh paint

if the evidence has gone, what is he/she left with? Clean, well kept kennels, healthy dogs......and maybe new puppy owners who really don't like kenneled dogs, or maybe feel they have an axe to grind, who knows, but I can't see anyone closing down the AB status without good evidence. Maybe a potential owner could take in a camera, or fone with video, and take this sort of evidence, bit cloak and dagger, :rolleyes: but another way of showing how things are. Without spot checks, they are hardly likely to get caught out. :)

Of course people may expect spick and span kennels and then repost that the breeder had make shift puppy quarters in a bedroom or the kitchen which is what most of us do. 

I think it would be dreadful if only those with the money to pay for top notch facilities and equipment were considered good breeders.

It is the quality and care that the breeding stock (theres that word again, LOL :D ) receive, and not whether the paint is pealing and the carpet a bit stained tatty should count.

I had missing lino on my kitchen floor for years that the dogs had chewed and my new kitchen already has some tooth marks from my new pup, and it is going to have to last me at least the next 15 years..

Well, if someone came in my home they would think...oh my god....its not suitable for humans never mind dogs :D :D :D :D.....oh the joys of living in a dump you are doing up with very little money :D :D but, the love, care and warmth inside this old pile of bricks and timber is quite evident ;)

I'm sorry if my post has rattled anyone whos dogs live in the home and have bits made into whelping areas, or don't have carpets that match the curtains, i really didnt mean to offend you....(and I'v just described my home again ;) curtains very cheap off ebay or auctions, none of which match :D but they keep the dark out and the room warm. I was thinking more of the filthy dirty places, doggy do everywhere, the other dogs (not mum and pups) being kept in poor conditions, or ill looking, that sort of thing. it is quite easy, if complained about, to remove the dogs to their mates down the road, have a scrub up and a paint job. make it look a bit more as things 'should be'. be that inside the house, or the sheds outside.

think it would be dreadful if only those with the money to pay for top notch facilities and equipment were considered good breeders.
Certainly agree with you. And I must stop using the term 'breeding stock' thats my horse stud peticoat showing again ;)