and licences for breeders...

If breeders cannot produce a licence the Kennel club will contact the council directly ... :-)

http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/item/4154/23/5/3

Once again targeting reputable breeders.  This won't touch BYB's and puppy farmers, who already breed back to back and don't register pups.

But there are plenty of BYB's and also puppy farmers who do KC register too, at least it will stop them from sullying the KC's name, which is what we really want to try to achieve IMO, to make a KC pup come from a good source.

Hopefully, though I am probably a loooooong way off yet, people will eventually realise that none KC is almost surely a sign of a puppy farm and someone who does not have the breeds interest at heart.

The rest is up to the councils to make sure any licensed breeders are doing the job right and why someone is breeding and not KC registering should flag up questions.

Hopefully, though I am probably a loooooong way off yet, people will eventually realise that none KC is almost surely a sign of a puppy farm

I'd have thought the great majority of big puppy farms WILL be council licensed, so it won't make one bit of difference there.

What difference will it make to reputable breeders??. If they breed 5 or more litters they will need to be licenced, that is the local authorities requirements anyway and they should be happy to comply with that. If they breed less it wont make any difference.

> Once again targeting reputable breeders.

how many reputable breeders need to breed 5 litters a year? 

it will also alert the councils

I see it as a great step in the right direction...

people who don't register pups.. no-one can control that except those who purchase from them. 

surely doing what they 'can' do is better than nothing at all..

We all complain about the amount of litters breeders register.. even a little step, is a step in the right direction

I'd have thought the great majority of big puppy farms WILL be council licensed, so it won't make one bit of difference there.

True, however, they will not be able to KC register more than one litter per bitch per year as per the license requirements (that was a lot of per's :-) )

So they will either be none registered pups, or at least a bitch will not be bred to death.

So they will either be none registered pups, or at least a bitch will not be bred to death.

Sadly I think it will simply be the other registry used instead -which Joe Public can't tell apart from the real thing.

Possibly....... those intent will always find a way. The GP need to get wiser.

But all we can hope for is that the KC are not unknowingly a part of it anymore and can defend their own reputation.

To me it is important that the KC stay reputable and veer away as much as possible from this type of breeder, instead of counting the money coming in.

I'm really happy they are starting to take a stand. :-)

Just a thought, I am not up on how browsers work but a lot of JP turn to the net when looking for a pup. If we start a thread on CD with a title "Pups for sale" or similar and all of us post our thoughts on the best way to look for a pup would it not appear on google once they start to look.
It could become a sticky and be there all the time to try and catch some for educational purposes.
Admin ???
Aileen
Sorry not hijacking so much as expanding a theme :-)

You need to get a lot of hits to get to the top. What occurs now is a certain wellknown puppy site is first.

The GP need to get wiser.

Which is why I would like to see compulsory health testing for all KC registered pups, not just those from an AB -then KC registration will start to mean a lot more.

Of course it won't stop the doodle litters that are produced in between the registered ones.....

Jo

A step in the right direction, but it won't stop the BYB's who register one litter with the KC and can charge more for them, and the next litter with the mickey mouse registration scheme and charge less.
The GP who are looking for a pet tend to just go to the most local and the cheapest price.
Very often they will aquire a pup via Gumtree, Loot, or local papers or one of the many sites on the net now that sell puppies. I am horrified at some of the adverts on Facebook a link popped up and I looked. I can't look now as I get so upset, and very often there were people making offers and bartering.
The whole dog breeding system needs an overhaul, I honestly feel that those breeders who do everything within current guidelines would have nothing to fear, but at least it would do something to stop the misery that some poor bitches and puppies are bred in.

>how many reputable breeders need to breed 5 litters a year? 

I know a few judges that do.

I bred a litter last year, and one in the summer of 2010, none planned for the next few years, so it doesn't affect me.  (Before anyone asks.)

I don't understand the problem with this policy, rather applaud it, as the law of the land stipulates that any one who breeds a fifth litter in any 12 month period is required to hold a breeders licence from their local authority.

for a long time many of us complained that the KC registered more than five litters from breeders who were not licensed, so finally they are making sure that those using it's services are not breaking the law.

This would include such breeders having to leave over 12 months between any bitch having another litter.

No it won't help with puppy farming, the impression is always given that puppy farms are unlicensed, but many are actually licensed.

> I know a few judges that do.

>

Yes so do we!

On paper this is a good step by the KC, just hope they enforce it.  But what about the breeders who have 4 -5 KC reg litters pa PLUS the same again "on the side" of non KC reg ( but pedigree) litters.  I could name 3 or 4 right now who are advertising on puppy websites the money earning non reg pups in addition to their KC reg litters.  Most of whom are also judges and on various breed committees / show societies, and a couple have their Irish address to co-own and co-breed litters there at the same time!

And what about the stud dog owners who may never have a litter in their name but tout their males around to any bitch in the UK and abroad and are responsible therefore for 70% of the progeny reg in a breed in the UK over the past 5 years.  Surely they should be answerable to the KC also?

Any right minded person must realiase that anyone producing 5 litters or more a year should come to the notice of the local council.
The impact on the community, one way or another, must have implications on noise, waste managment, increased traffic, health and welfare.

Five litters of Newfoundlands for example could produce 50+ pups, many of which will be advertised and sold within that council area.

> Any right minded person must realiase that anyone producing 5 litters or more a year should come to the notice of the local council

But even now there are instances where the local council AND KC are well aware of some individuals producing way over the 5 litter limit, KC reg & not reg in the same year, RSPCA involved on a couple of counts yet still nothing is enforced!

We welcome these rules but they must be upheld I reality. 

> We welcome these rules but they must be upheld I reality.

In reality these rules are being enforced by a skeleton staff hanging onto their jobs by a thread.
Easy cases - soft targets....are quicker to clean up, cheaper to administrate and ultimately save on court fees.

Only those who makes a living from breeding dogs would probably put up much of a fight.