Originally Posted by Jacqui_UK

My take on this is there should not be a monopoly. I personally have a huge issue with KC as I thought I was doing the right thing getting a pedigree dog but I was shocked at the breeder who I was going to get a pup from. I eventually got a rescue retriever which took time.

KC makes sure that both parents are pedigrees and that is it really. There needs to be a law and licence policy brought in for puppys. Having seen first hand that pedigree does not mean best practice I personally think it should be a radical rethink.

Looking for a new dog I am shocked to see how many puppies are now being offered free to good homes. Must be the credit crunch kicking in.

Originally Posted by sallyanne

How sad counting posts You must have been bored tonight,I didn't realise there was a limit on how many times you could reply to a thread! Would you like to enlighten me Is there ?
If you have a problem with me Janice take it to PM,obviously you have nothing more constructive to add to the thread,what are you trying to achieve as flaming is against forum rules or are you not familar with those ?

ok firstly no i wasnt bored,secondly you can post away,thirdly and most important to me is i "FLAMING" you? where?
and yes i do undersatand, and abide by the rules..just because i have an oppion of my own doesnt mean ANYTHING other than just that...


All threads run there course so your point is ?
My point was stated at the begining and through the thread,I would have thought that was obvious,do you not read ?

Maybe I should be using the ignore button.

Originally Posted by sallyanne

I know this is off Topic,but I thought I'd post it for Janice because she doesn't believe the KC take action against individuals as you can clearly see they do.
Kennel Club Fact File Rule A42 Disciplinary Case Gordon - The Kennel Club

Kennel Club Fact File Rule A42 Disciplinary Case Gordon
03-Nov-08

Kennel Club Fact File

Rule A42 Disciplinary Case

Disciplinary Sub Committee Hearing

30 October 2008

The Kennel Club -v- Mr G A Gordon

Kennel Club Rule A 42

The Committee, having carefully considered the evidence, find that the complaint brought by the Kennel Club under Kennel Club Rule A42 a (1) (b) against Mr G A Gordon, in that he repeatedly engaged in threatening and abusive behaviour at the Northumberland and Durham Labrador Retriever Club Working Test at Hope Farm held on 20 April 2008, resulting in the issue of a police caution by Northumbria Police, is upheld.

The Committee noted that Mr Gordon admitted and apologised for the incident and recognised it as being inappropriate. The behaviour complained of, namely threatening, abusive conduct and putting people in fear is totally unacceptable and cannot be tolerated at Kennel Club licensed events. Everyone should behave in an appropriate manner so that all may feel secure. This incident is not commonplace and the Committee felt there were mitigating circumstances. The Committee therefore wished to issue a reminder to participants that private issues have no place in the context of licensed events.

The Committee impose the following penalties:

1
To warn him to his future conduct
[A42 j(1)]

2
To censure him
[A42 j(2)]

3
To disqualify him from exhibiting at, taking part in, attending

and/or having any connection with any event licensed by the Club. If any person disqualified under this sub-paragraph shall attend any canine event whilst disqualified the General

Committee shall have the power to increase the period of disqualification
[A42 j(4)]

The suspensions and disqualifications are to be for a period of eighteen months (18 months) from 30 October 2008.
The Committee, following the impositions of these penalties, would draw the attention of the Respondent/s to the effect of Rule A42 sub-sections n.

Dundee I haven't found any proposed legislation but it's on the KC site that they have asked for it,it's probably a long way off.
According to DLRC an early day motion has been passed.

Originally Posted by JANICE199

Originally Posted by JANICE199

Originally Posted by JANICE199

this one really made me chuckle...have i ever said i dont believe the KC dont take action? if so please feel free to show me where..
i for one wont be bullied into changing my views...And just to set the rcord straight,,i DO NOT agree with puppy farms or the like..and i have stated i personaly think a NEW body would be a great idea,but it seams thats wrong as well...

Originally Posted by Dundee

I haven't been able to come up with anything other than the petition on DLRC, so I'm not sure if this is simply a publicity stunt by DLRC to raise its profile following the Pedigree Dogs documentary.

However, IF it does go ahead (and I think there are huge barriers to it going ahead anyway), then the KC is the only organisation that comes even close to provide the means for implementing it. I totally agree with raindog... there are flaws within the KC but it is the best thing we have and it would be foolish to dismiss it.

There appears to be some confusion as to what the KC is and what these other registration businesses (DLRC is not the only one). The KC is not just a registration, but the information DLRC has (even assuming that it is actually kept as a record), cannot be compared to the records the KC hold. All information regards health tests, results, achievements, matings, progeny etc will be held with the individual dog registered with the KC. Not so with any of the others.

Talking of which, has anyone seen the new KC online Health database? At the moment it's limited to searching by registration or stud book number, but I believe they are working on extending this to searching by name.... this will be hugely useful.

In addition to registration, the KC promotes good ownership through the KC Good Citizen Scheme, Accredited Breeders Scheme, Fit For Function Fit for Life, Companion Dogs, all manner of canine competitive sports not just showing, in conjunction with the BVA running the various Health Testing Schemes, donates large sums of money for research into various health conditions etc etc etc.....

Compare this to organisations that are simply glorified certificate writing companies.... there is NO comparison, and it is naive to suppose that having other registration companies is good because it breaks some sort of monopoly.