Hello All,
One of the clubs I am involved in needs to "beef up" their regs re what is acceptable when breeding etc. We would like it to include selection of parents, quality and temperament. Now I know it is very hard to enforce these things but can anybody give me an example of a set of rules that do at least try? Any useful advice, suggestions or opinions welcome.
Thanks,
Jeff.

If you look at the top of the breeding forum there's a sticky with dozens of breed clubs codes of ethics,HTH :)

Many thanks!! Also looking for any examples of breed clubs having "robust" rules and regs.
Jeff.

(Excuse me if I'm telling you something you already know, but it's not clear from your post.) You need to bear in mind that the KC has now mandated it's own Code of Ethics which ALL breed clubs must comply with.

Any breed-specific additions to this will need to go through an approval process by the KC.

M.

You need to bear in mind that the KC has now mandated it's own Code of Ethics which ALL breed clubs must comply with.
  Took the words out my mouth there.    I guess the breed clubs will need to do add ons, there are pros and cons to the KC steps as some clubs were too slack and others have went far beyond what the KC 's covers.

Thanks guys, yes I was aware of that change. What I am really trying to establish is what, if anything, breed clubs can or have done to discourage "questionable" matings. As an example if somebody had over used a stud dog or wanted to mate a bitch that really wasn't good enough. As far as I can see there is little that can be done but I want to make sure. :-)
Jeff.

> or wanted to mate a bitch that really wasn't good enough.

It's very hard to see how they could devise a code to cover this as it is surely so subjective. 

Unfortunately most of those that break Club rules won't be with the Club and will call it for supposedly being to stringent!

Hi Isabel,
Yes that was the conclusion I had nearly reached but wanted to make sure.
Thanks,
Jeff.

This is not yet a problem but probably because we are not stringent yet! :-)
Thanks,
Jeff.