Just a little idea.

Discussion in 'The Breeding Ground' started by ma-vie-en-vert, Oct 11, 2008.

  1. ma-vie-en-vert

    ma-vie-en-vert New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2008
    Messages:
    315
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    1 dog & 7 cats.
    Location:
    Yorkton, Saskatchewan, Canada
    What would you guys say, if there was a law passed that all dogs that were not CKC, or AKC etc. registered had to be spayed/neutered by law?
     
  2. Romy

    Romy Taxiderpy

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2006
    Messages:
    10,234
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Olympia, WA
    Sounds terrible to me. A lot of working breeds are not AKC and CKC recognized because their parent clubs do not want them to be. A law like that would be the death of many old lines of working dogs.
     
  3. ma-vie-en-vert

    ma-vie-en-vert New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2008
    Messages:
    315
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    1 dog & 7 cats.
    Location:
    Yorkton, Saskatchewan, Canada
    Like what breeds? And what about the parent clubs?? (I don't know a whole lot about all that stuff...)

    BTW this isn't my idea, I just heard someone talking about it so don't think I'm for it or anything, lol. I just wanted to see what everyone here thought.
     
  4. Romy

    Romy Taxiderpy

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2006
    Messages:
    10,234
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Olympia, WA
    Well, this article has some pretty good reasons why folks don't want their breed AKC recognized. Granted, it's pretty slanted against the AKC, but you can get their points through the bitterness. I am trying to find a somewhat complete list of non-recognized breeds, but all I can find is some articles estimating there are "approximately 400"

    http://www.netpets.org/dogs/newsroom/akcfss1.html

    A handful of American ones I can think of from the top of my head are:
    Catahoula leopard dogs
    Alapaha blue blood bull dogs
    Chinook
    Carolina Dog
    Xoloscuintle

    Edit: This site has a boatload of breeds listed, most of them very old. Much older than dobes and rotties and shepherds, oh my.

    http://www.arba.org/
     
  5. I do not agree with forced sterilization under any circumstances.

    What business does the government have telling me what I can and cannot do with my property?

    What is next? Book burning? No red automobiles?
     
  6. Pam111

    Pam111 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,845
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I agree. While, yes, I would love to see more dogs spayed or neutered, the government treats animals as property in every other law, so this shouldn't be different. Though, I suppose they do tell us what to do with our property in other ways, such as car titling and inspections...hmmm, I guess I see that more as equivalent to dog licensing, though, rather than altering the dog.

    Maybe the government could offer some sort of incentive for dog altering?

    If there was mandatory spay/neutering, I would not want it to only exclude ACK/CKC dogs. Like a PP said, there are other solid breeding programs that are not registered with them.
     
  7. ACooper

    ACooper Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2007
    Messages:
    27,771
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    IN
    I would say not only do I disagree with it, it would make no difference in the big picture. Most of the BYB's I know of have AKC/CKC registrations on their dogs, pet stores selling puppies as well. Orson is AKC registered for example and he came from a major jerkhole.

    Open up any news paper and you can find BYB AKC/CKC all the live long day.

    Now, if AKC and CKC changed their rules and policies something like this *could* have potential to work...........not that I would agree with it, but it would have more potential at being effective.

    But that will never happen just because of the money issues. If the AKC changed their policies they would lose tons of potential registers and they would never have that.

    As to why I disagree with it? More restrictions on MY rights, and again............laws only affect the law abiding.
     
  8. Pam111

    Pam111 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,845
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That's also a good point. My dogs were registerable ( I just didn't bother with the paperwork), but they are not from quality breeders, I must admit
     
  9. corgi_love

    corgi_love New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2008
    Messages:
    1,253
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  10. Zoom

    Zoom Twin 2.0

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    40,739
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    Horrible idea. I do not want to own an AKC Aussie (brainless, multicolored Goldens that they are) and many of the other breeds I want are not recognized by the AKC to begin with (Fila, anyone?).

    Red summed it up quite well.
     
  11. corgipower

    corgipower Tweleve Enthusiest

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2007
    Messages:
    8,233
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    4 dogs
    Location:
    here
    I agree with it being a bad idea. Many breeds aren't AKC recognized, many parent clubs of AKC breeds don't want their members' dogs involved with AKC - take stock dog border collies and earth dog JRTs for some more common breeds. A lot of breeds working in protection venues aren't registered, some aren't even purebred. Also, registration in any organization doesn't in any way reflect quality.

    I also don't want to b e forced to sterilize my pets. There are health benefits and there are health risks associated with it, and it's a decision to be made between me and my vet.

    The time spent trying to find legislative ways to combat substandard breeding practices would be better spent educating potential buyers on what to look for.
     
  12. TheGoldenRetriever

    TheGoldenRetriever New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2008
    Messages:
    1,299
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    :yikes: Forced sterilization is hardly a "little idea"!!

    WAY too intrusive and as others have stated it would be the death of many legitimate non-registered breeds, including working lines of breeds that are otherwise recognized but the working lines are not registered.

    Ranches in the Western U.S. and elsewhere strongly depend upon their working line dogs! Even though they are from recognized breeds, these working dogs are not registered with kennel clubs. Most would NOT make good pets but they are tireless workers as ranch hands.

    "Mandatory" sterilization would not stop breeding of these dogs because the economic consequences to ranches would be devastating. If allowed to affect these ranchers, the general public WOULD begin to feel those consequences as well. (You wanna pay $50 per lb. for meat because ranchers are forced to find other, more expensive means of herding and guarding their stock?)

    ^^^ Agree ... oh what, about 150% ;)

    City and municipal governments in many areas already do. Licensing laws in those areas offer reduced yearly fees for licensing of altered dogs as opposed to intact. Sometimes differences in amounts can be staggering, such as $25 yearly to license an altered dog as opposed to $250 yearly for intact dogs. Such laws may make sense in big cities with free-roaming dog problems, but not in rural areas with many working dogs. Just another example of how the very same laws do NOT work everywhere.

    ^^^^ ... and this is exactly the problem ... People screaming "there oughta be a law!" when they are woefully uninformed.

    A good example would be that extremely short-sighted can't-see-beyond-my-own-little-corner-of-the-world person who suggested that "little idea" to you in the first place. :rolleyes:
    Please inform that person.
     
  13. corgipower

    corgipower Tweleve Enthusiest

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2007
    Messages:
    8,233
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    4 dogs
    Location:
    here
    Mmmm...$250 a year for licensing?!? I don't call that an incentive plan, I call that forced sterilization. Consider the small scale quality breeder who maybe has four, five, six intact dogs. Now you're talking at least $1000 a year. Many of them can't afford that when compared to $100 if they're sterilized.

    What makes sense is educating and outreach. More low-cost spay/neuter options. Around here, I can get a male neutered for something around $50.00 I'm not sure what a female costs.
     
  14. TheGoldenRetriever

    TheGoldenRetriever New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2008
    Messages:
    1,299
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well technically it's not "forced" sterilization ... if you can come up with cash then you can keep intact dogs. But let's call a shovel a shovel ... what it is in reality is a tax penalty for keeping intact dogs. Further, the actual effect of such laws is less overall compliance with licensing. That's why I don't favor such "incentive" plans either. ;)

    Exactly ... but especially on the low-cost options. Education alone doesn't do it ... people respond to options that have a positive effect on their wallets.
     
  15. Whisper

    Whisper Kaleidoscopic Eye

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2006
    Messages:
    13,747
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    4; 2 dogs, 2 cats
    I would say "feck you" if someone wanted to make that a law.

    I love border collies -the working border collie- and I will never buy a BC from an AKC show breeder. There are plenty of reputable breeders who choose other registries for their working bred dogs.
    Plus, I'm not a fan of being forced to do anything, especially when it comes to how I take care of my dogs. Two equally responsible, caring dog owners can have a great deal of difference with how they take care of their dogs.
     
  16. Renee750il

    Renee750il Felurian

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    94,266
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    3, Bimmer, GSDX (m); Kharma, Fila Brasileiro (f);
    Location:
    Where the selas blooms
    Home Page:
    The government just needs to keep its nasty, greedy, lying, sneaking nose out of my dogs. Period.

    This kind of crap, like BSL, is just a pandering - and, sadly, a largely successful attempt to keep our attention elsewhere rather than on the sh1t that's really going on.
     
  17. Right on, Renee.

    It is not about dogs.

    It is all about property rights.
     
  18. Zoom

    Zoom Twin 2.0

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    40,739
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    We do need to find some other way of couching that though, because while it's the absolute truth, it sounds very harsh and sterile, which is NOT the way to combat the touchy-feely emotional propaganda the other side is using. We all know that our dogs mean more to us than we can properly say. But when you start throwing "property rights" around in terms of our rights to our dogs, you give people the impression your dogs mean as much to you as a motorcycle would.

    (I'm squaring off with some anti-dock/crop people right now and this is what I'm getting from them.)
     
  19. The moment dogs graduate from being property we are all sunk.

    They don't have to like it, but it is a fact. I OWN my dog, just like I own my van, my clothing, my shoes, etc.

    It has NOTHING to do with dogs. It is about MY RIGHTS. This means this type of legislation will have trickle down effect on everyone, even people who don't want to show or breed dogs as a hobby.

    :)
     
  20. Renee750il

    Renee750il Felurian

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    94,266
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    3, Bimmer, GSDX (m); Kharma, Fila Brasileiro (f);
    Location:
    Where the selas blooms
    Home Page:
    What Zoomer's saying is that we have to dress it up for these numbnutz. The other side is going for the mindless, emotional, knee jerk reaction and no amount of rational, logical, intelligent information and logic is going to penetrate the impact that has, so WE have to devise tactics that will appeal to and break through that segment of the populace.
     

Share This Page