i have a question for a friend of mine who breeds. i know the pups she places as pets dont go with papers, would she be able to join this scheme if she had a signed contract saying that papers would be passed on when she recives proof of neutering?

She should perhaps clarify with the KC but I can't see the point myself as there would be no difference in withholding the papers and issuing them with endorsements not to allow progeny to be registered as neither can prevent someone breeding unregistered puppies if they slip through your vetting process.

The only people who could answer that would be the KC themselves.

It does ask in the KC questionairre that is given to all new pup owners if they have been given the KC registration form or advised that it would be sent to them at a later date. I think it would defeat the object of the KCABS if breeders don't give out the kc documentation and thus they wouldn't allow it. Maybe wrong but have just read through all the bump that I give out in their sales wallet, the kc q also has to have the kc reg name and number along with new owners details on it.
Just curious really as to why the breeder doesn't register pups for pet homes and doesn't just endorse the kc reg with R: Progeny not eligable for registration?

hi, she does register all puppies but just doesn't give the papers with her ones that go to pet homes.

Sorry didn't read properly, still think that the KC may take a dim view about it but would be worth checking if she wants to join the scheme...........Rachael

Certainly KC registration and passing on said papers is part of our breed clubs code of ethics.

After all at homing age you can never be certain (mis marks excepted) whether an ugly duckling won't turn out the swan.

> hi, she does register all puppies but just doesn't give the papers with her ones that go to pet homes.

Have to say if I were buying a pedigree pup as a pet I would walk away from this woman's pups - no matter how well bred etc.  What is the point of paying for a pedigree if you don't get the registration papers?  If she wouldn't trust me with the papers why trust me with one of her pups?

If this happened to me with an accredited breeder they would be reported I'm afraid :(

thank you for you input all. i will pass on to my friend. i dont know bout these things as i dont breed.

What is the point of paying for a pedigree if you don't get the registration papers?  If she wouldn't trust me with the papers why trust me with one of her pups?

In some breeds this is the norm for all pet puppies. Certainly it is in Papillons.

Marianne, so do any Pap breeders belong to the ABS and how do they get around with holding the papers when puppies go as pets?  Do they charge normal pet price or a lower price as they are keeping papers - or are papers forwarded when the breeder has received proof of neuter/spaying?

I am not a member of the ABS and I do home all my pups and adults with restricted paperwork.  I also keep in close contact with the new owners and offer ££'s back on purchase price when I get a letter from there vet to confirm spay / neutering has taken place.  I also telephone the vet to check as one very enterprising lady sent a letter printed in her own home using the vets details.  She then proceeded to mate the bitch and have a litter from her.  6 months later I got my girl back.  Always pays to check and check again.

There is also the new owners who are happy to see that there pup has all the paperwork but don't need to or want to have it.

Edited to add:- There are quite a number of Papillon breeders who are ABS members

Just to add to what Joan said (who has loads more experience in the breed than I do) -pet Papillon pups are often sold at roughly half the price of show or breeding prospects.

> pet Papillon pups are often sold at roughly half the price of show or breeding prospects.

Hello Marianne

You are right enough that some breeders do sell what they consider pets at a lower price, but just becasue a pup has a bit of white somewhere the standard says it shouldn't, doesn't make it any less of a healthy companion.

When it comes to charging for pups I do not defferenciate between pet and show.  For me all my pups go to pet homes just so happens that the arrangement with some new owners (of my dogs) is that they wish to show or breed to which they are usually quite happy for me to be involved in to a certain degree regarding adivice.

ETA:- Any that do go to "show" homes also go with export and progeny not to be registered restrictions in place only to be lifted when both myself and the new owner agree it is right to do so.

What is the difference between registering the pups and withholding papers, and registering the pups and putting endorsements on.

I can't see the difference except that the owner would have the papers too, which if they are buying a kc registered puppy they are entitled to, and I would guess that it is against the ABS to withhold them (although it is a guess).

Neither actually stops the new owner from breeding in the future.  Both prevents them from registering any future puppies.  So am puzzled as to the difference.

> What is the difference between registering the pups and withholding papers, and registering the pups and putting endorsements on.

Registered with endorsements but papers provided would allow the owner to show the dog at KC events should they so choose.  Without registration papers the dog couldn't be shown.

As you mention whether with endorsed papers or without papers at all does not prevent breeding, merely progeny from such being registered with the KC.

regards, Teri 

Thanks Teri (or in the case of working dogs, entering test and trials).

It was more that I don't understand why a breeder would withhold papers (as MarianneB has said happens) when selling to pet  homes.  Is that to stop them showing too then?

No idea :-D  Marianne's 'on board' - perhaps she'll explain :)

Teri

Neither actually stops the new owner from breeding in the future.  Both prevents them from registering any future puppies.  So am puzzled as to the difference.

Well you can still SHOW an endorsed pup, and I do know some breeders who are very picky about what dogs they have bred that go into the show ring and would be horrified if anyone showed a pup bought as a pet and wasn't good enough.

Personally I'm with you though, and I think it is better to endorse and sell all pet pups as registered as if anyone then sells unreg'd pups, warning bells should ring as to WHY those pups were not reg'd. By making it common for pups to not be reg'd when sold as pets, it makes it easier for people to breed from unreg'd or endorsed bitches and sell all the pups as pets. I've been had like that myself! My first Papillon was a pet only and I had been told several times that when buying a pet, I would get no papers. Breeder came recommended via another breeder fairly well known. When I collected my pup I didn't expect any paperwork and it wasn't until later that I found out that the mother of the pups was unregistered herself! And I most certainly do not agree with breeding from unregistered dogs. Yet this bitch had been mated by a show dog with an RCC! She then went on to have a second litter just months later. :(

Yes to expand on what I just said -I do know Pap breeders that would do anything they can to prevent anything but the very best dogs bred by them from entering the show ring as they do not want any dog not really good to be seen, not wanting to risk getting known for having bred something less than excellent.

> not wanting to risk getting known for having bred something less than excellent.

LOL Marianne, sounds like a tall order but yes there are those who strive :)
only glad there are those who remember they are living animals and treat them
as such and hopefully find the best homes available.

> as they do not want any dog not really good to be seen, not wanting to risk getting known for having bred something less than excellent

hmmm, that strikes me as strange. is it not generally accepted that you are almost never ever going to get an entire litter of champions? clearly some pups are not going to be of the highest quality in conformation or else there would be no point in showing.

and if these pups are not registered is it not very disappointing if the unregistered pup does an ugly duckling routine and turns out great? (not common but happens)

for me i'd hope that a breeder would be proud of all their pups. it gives people searching for a stud etc a better idea of what the dog throws as well.

hmmm, that strikes me as strange. is it not generally accepted that you are almost never ever going to get an entire litter of champions? clearly some pups are not going to be of the highest quality in conformation or else there would be no point in showing.


Well it's more of a possibility I guess in a breed that has such small litters.

> Well it's more of a possibility I guess in a breed that has such small litters.

true but i don;t think any breeder would expect a litter of perfect pups

it just seems a strange way to do things to me

It's just that some people are perfectionists. :)

> It's just that some people are perfectionists.

Or wish to appear so by ushering these puppies away without papers ;-)
I doubt this practice is compatible with the ABS but perhaps worth checking, as what I would doubt the KC would want, paticularly in these precarious times for them, is to encourage the public to accept that registration is unimportant.

> Yes to expand on what I just said -I do know Pap breeders that would do anything they can to prevent anything but the very best dogs bred by them from entering the show ring as they do not want any dog not really good to be seen, not wanting to risk getting known for having bred something less than excellent.

You could look at this another way too, they also might wish to distance themselves from anything they've bred (disown) which they would prefer no-one saw or knew about ;)  bad mouths/teeth, poor construction/slipping patellas/poor hips/crossed eyes ;) etc.  mighty hard to prove who produced this kind of pups routinely if they aren't given papers or are unregistered ;)  but to me that could be seen as deceit, it's all very well saying they don't want anything but perfection in the ring but it does give a false idea of what they are really breeding and how much value their pedigree is to the breed ;)

In light of 'that' programme and the resulting fall-out, I would think that breeders would want to be all above board and not seen to be hiding things :(

ETA  It's no wonder Joe Public accept pups without papers from puppy farmers if respected and seemingly responsible breeders are doing this :( :(

it's all very well saying they don't want anything but perfection in the ring but it does give a false idea of what they are really breeding and how much value their pedigree is to the breed ;-)

Believe me Dill, these people are NOTHING like that at ALL. Not at all a case of routinely producing poor specimens -far from it, the opposite. Which is why anything less good would stand out as the quality is known to be so very high.

I'm sure you're right - about the people you know ;)   but if it is the 'norm' then those less scrupulous have a precedent to follow and who will be any the wiser? how does someone not 'in the loop' tell the difference?  :(