NEW DOG/LITTER REGISTRATION SYSTEM

Everything about Tamaskan Dogs that does not fit within the other topics in this section.
User avatar
Gaby
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 1205
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 1:08 am
Location: Groningen, the Netherlands

Re: NEW DOG/LITTER REGISTRATION SYSTEM

Post by Gaby » Sat Dec 01, 2012 11:02 pm

I like the new registration system very much! I will order a replacement as soon as I know more from the BVA about Mila's hipscores.

User avatar
Tiantai
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 2558
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2011 10:16 pm
Location: Canada (North York, Ontario)

Re: NEW DOG/LITTER REGISTRATION SYSTEM

Post by Tiantai » Sun Dec 02, 2012 2:09 am

TerriHolt wrote:
nivenj wrote:It would't be so bad if the interest in membership had materialised, but alas, it hasn't so far :-)
A lot of members, some from the uk, seem to have detached from the forum. The maine coon breeder (who i was hoping to approach for a maine coon kitten, shame :( ) seems to have followed lynn across (as well as a few others)... That another possible member down :cry:
Well like us, I think it will be a matter of time before those who continued to follow the Blus come to realize their true colours. As far as I've seen, most of the people still supporting Lynn are those who joined this forum not to long ago and only just before that drama broke out here so I understand how difficult it must have been for them to decide who was right and who was wrong as I too was on neutral ground at the time. I can pretty much draw parallels in this situation between the Blus supporters (and former supporters) and those former RPK supporters in this case. It won't surprise me anymore when some of those current followers of Lynn and Jennie might later turn against them like most of us here already had in the future.
Image

User avatar
Nino
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 3106
Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2010 11:13 am
Location: Aalborg - Denmark

Re: NEW DOG/LITTER REGISTRATION SYSTEM

Post by Nino » Mon Dec 03, 2012 8:29 pm

nivenj wrote::D Thanks John, but as I said, it was not and never was an issue about the cost. I understand and appreciate the costs associated with starting afresh. As you know the TDSGB was also run by the blu's so we have had to start the UK National club from scratch. So far i'm still £400 out of pocket in getting it up off the ground, so believe me...I understand where your coming. from. It would't be so bad if the interest in membership had materialised, but alas, it hasn't so far :-)
I am sure that it is only a matter of time before it will be pick up.. it is always hard to start out!
the sucky thing is when you have money hanging there.. :?
>> Nino <<
Image

User avatar
arianwenarie
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 1244
Joined: Wed May 19, 2010 5:07 pm
Location: USA

Re: NEW DOG/LITTER REGISTRATION SYSTEM

Post by arianwenarie » Tue Feb 05, 2013 3:59 am



Any idea what that (^) is all about? :?: My best guess is that she's referencing the public database and restoring original kennel names...?

Rahne

Re: NEW DOG/LITTER REGISTRATION SYSTEM

Post by Rahne » Tue Feb 05, 2013 12:01 pm

arianwenarie wrote:

Any idea what that (^) is all about? :?: My best guess is that she's referencing the public database and restoring original kennel names...?
No idea. We already discussed it at Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/groups/TamaskanDebateGroup/). She might be talking about restoring the original kennel names but then she never bred those dogs.. It could also be about 'Fox' :roll:

User avatar
JoaquimJoe
Tamific (Novice)
Tamific (Novice)
Posts: 284
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 9:03 pm
Location: Berlicum (The Netherlands)
Contact:

Re: NEW DOG/LITTER REGISTRATION SYSTEM

Post by JoaquimJoe » Tue Feb 05, 2013 8:51 pm

Registration documents looks really very nice and professional!!
Thanks for all your work with on it!
Don't appologise for your ancestry, but stand straight and be proud (Dogwisdom)

Rahne

Re: NEW DOG/LITTER REGISTRATION SYSTEM

Post by Rahne » Tue Feb 05, 2013 8:55 pm

JoaquimJoe wrote:Registration documents looks really very nice and professional!!
Thanks for all your work with on it!
:D

User avatar
arianwenarie
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 1244
Joined: Wed May 19, 2010 5:07 pm
Location: USA

Re: NEW DOG/LITTER REGISTRATION SYSTEM

Post by arianwenarie » Sat May 04, 2013 1:17 am

This is sort of a 2 part question...so here goes:

1. If a dog is registered with the TDR on conditional or limited registration, but is used for breeding anyway (without TDR approval), will those dogs be registered with the TDR on limited registration if bred with another TDR registered Tamaskan (regardless of registration (i.e. full, conditional, limited))?
2. If the pups produced (from #1) will not be registered with the TDR on limited registration, will they be listed in the TDR database as purebred Tams but clearly shown as NOREG on their ID to indicate they're not registered Tams?

I honestly think it'd be beneficial if the latter were done: breeding restricted Tam puppies produced (as long as with 2 TDR registered Tams irrespective of registration status) to be included in the database, but not registered. Of course, this would require cooperation from the owners of the dogs/pups to provide this information to the TDR. :p

weylyn

Re: NEW DOG/LITTER REGISTRATION SYSTEM

Post by weylyn » Sat May 04, 2013 8:59 am

That is a good question. And I also agree that I understand that they would not be registered but I also think it is best for the breed a sa whole that all litters would be placed in the database. The more information the better ......

User avatar
arianwenarie
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 1244
Joined: Wed May 19, 2010 5:07 pm
Location: USA

Re: NEW DOG/LITTER REGISTRATION SYSTEM

Post by arianwenarie » Sat Nov 02, 2013 3:05 am

It has been a few months, so I suppose I'll try again.. XD

There was a discussion on the Facebook Tamaskan Debate Group about the current TDR registration system. Unfortunately, I can't link the discussion as I don't know how. Sorry...

In a nutshell, Reggie had explained registration status (in regards to purebred or not) and breeding status are two separate matters. Just because a dog has FULL registration status does not necessarily mean the dog is breeding quality.

This brings up my question: Should the TDR registration system consider distinguishing the two (registration status & breeding status) so as to minimize confusion and provide better clarity?

Unless...I've been interpreting the registration system wrong the entire time. I can see how it can be interpreted as such:

Only purebred Tamaskan (with verifiable DNA parentage testing results) can be registered with the TDR (registration status in regards to purebred or not). The FULL/CONDITIONAL/LIMITED registration statuses as described on the TDR website is breeding status; or rather, breeding potential status.

If this is the case, then how are accidental litters as a result of back-to-back matings registered if both parents are fully health tested? They'd fall under FULL registration status according to the rules. However, the breeder is in unintentional violation of the Code of Ethics... On another tangent, a breeder could also abuse this loophole and intentionally do back-to-back matings and still have their litters receive FULL unrestricted registration - not that I'm saying any breeder has done this, but there is room for exploitation nonetheless.

User avatar
Tiantai
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 2558
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2011 10:16 pm
Location: Canada (North York, Ontario)

Re: NEW DOG/LITTER REGISTRATION SYSTEM

Post by Tiantai » Sat Nov 02, 2013 5:08 am

Rahne also posted on the group about the flaws with the "case-by-case" decisions for accidental litters where a fully registered dog managed to mate with a dog who is missing some health test results. I do agree that the whole case-by-case decision can, unfortunately, open rooms for personal biases such as "I don't like you so NO" as she had stated. I'm not saying that the current TDR members and committees would do this to me in the future IF suddenly an accident happens on my future dogs, but just in a hypothetical sense.
arianwenarie wrote: Unless...I've been interpreting the registration system wrong the entire time. I can see how it can be interpreted as such:

Only purebred Tamaskan (with verifiable DNA parentage testing results) can be registered with the TDR (registration status in regards to purebred or not). The FULL/CONDITIONAL/LIMITED registration statuses as described on the TDR website is breeding status; or rather, breeding potential status.

If this is the case, then how are accidental litters as a result of back-to-back matings registered if both parents are fully health tested? They'd fall under FULL registration status according to the rules. However, the breeder is in unintentional violation of the Code of Ethics... On another tangent, a breeder could also abuse this loophole and intentionally do back-to-back matings and still have their litters receive FULL unrestricted registration - not that I'm saying any breeder has done this, but there is room for exploitation nonetheless.
Based upon a discussion in the old group before it got deleted by who knows, I was told by Regina that a breeder with an "oopsy" 6 months after a previous one would probably be put on a thorough investigation by the committee and that the second litter MIGHT not be registered at all. But that's just how I interpreted it. I don't know if that's what she means. Although it does seem to fall into the whole case-by-case investigation that Rahne mentioned and why she does not really like it as she flat out stated on facebook.
Image

User avatar
arianwenarie
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 1244
Joined: Wed May 19, 2010 5:07 pm
Location: USA

Re: NEW DOG/LITTER REGISTRATION SYSTEM

Post by arianwenarie » Sat Nov 02, 2013 5:21 am

Tiantai wrote:Rahne also posted on the group about the flaws with the "case-by-case" decisions for accidental litters where a fully registered dog managed to mate with a dog who is missing some health test results. I do agree that the whole case-by-case decision can, unfortunately, open rooms for personal biases such as "I don't like you so NO" as she had stated. I'm not saying that the current TDR members and committees would do this to me in the future IF suddenly an accident happens on my future dogs, but just in a hypothetical sense.
Exactly. It may just be me, but it seems like a continuing trend (and I am NOT pointing any fingers here): any litters that were in violation of the TDR breeding rules fell in the case-by-case basis ruling. I am afraid that may happen with Vala's (Sylvaen) most recent litter as well. I know I can ask "where does the case-by-case basis end?" and I will be met with the answer of: "well, that's exactly why it's a called case-by-case basis. These situations (X, Y, or Z) just so happened to be on a case-by-case basis." And thus, you can see how there's room for some serious abuse there too by citing every case where rules are violated (whether intentional or not) to fall under the 'case-by-case basis'.

I suppose I am just getting frustrated, so I apologize for my ranting and venting. I'd honestly just like a straight answer from the TDR and put an end to all this. Sure, people can say this topic shouldn't be discussed on the public forum nor with the public because it's an internal issue. Or the response of "See? We already have rules set. They're here - <insert links to TDR registration page and rules>". But I guess that's not good enough for me since I'm certain I'm not the only person who thinks there needs to be clarification on things based on what's happening that the public can see...

User avatar
HiTenshi16
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 4802
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 7:11 pm
Location: Princeton, TX US
Contact:

Re: NEW DOG/LITTER REGISTRATION SYSTEM

Post by HiTenshi16 » Sat Nov 02, 2013 5:44 am

I agree that there are too many "case-by-case" happenings. How many accidental litters or litters born by untested patents, that would go by a case by case basis, actually not been registered? And how many are actually following the guidelines when registering the litters (like faulty markings, incorrect bite, ect.)?
Image

User avatar
Tiantai
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 2558
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2011 10:16 pm
Location: Canada (North York, Ontario)

Re: NEW DOG/LITTER REGISTRATION SYSTEM

Post by Tiantai » Sat Nov 02, 2013 5:45 am

I am completely with you there. I have yet to own a Tamaskan but so far I don't like the case-by-case decision either from the way I am seeing things both here and on facebook. When joining the TDR in the future as Wrooftop, I want to be part of an organization where every breeder follows the strict rules as they are laid out and I don't want to see any excuses for breaking the rules like what was done a lot back when the Blus were still here. If I have an accident between a fully health tested registered dog and one that is registered but still awaiting crucial results for qualification towards breeding, I don't want a case-by-case investigation. I will instead hold off on any registration until the results are in and I strongly believe that THIS is the correct way to handle such a case. Even if one of the parent is not a registered Tamaskan, I don't care if the offsprings of the unintended outcross miraculously conform to the physical standards. I will not request any registration for what I did not plan for my future dogs to produce. I want to follow the rules as they will be by then and not be judged through this biased practice.
Image

User avatar
Hawthorne
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 1817
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 11:07 pm
Location: Pennsylvania | USA
Contact:

Re: NEW DOG/LITTER REGISTRATION SYSTEM

Post by Hawthorne » Sat Nov 02, 2013 7:26 pm

Even reputable breeders have accidental litters. And they CAN truly be accidents. Until you own a stud dog and breeding bitch you will never fully understand how intense that drive is for them to breed. One simply cannot leave their bitch in the yard alone, AT ALL. She will find a way. And the stud in a 5' horse crate will learn how to break out. They must be separated by distance. It's the only way to ensure no accidents. In a regular house situation, it is my opinion anyway, that there is no good way to leave a male and female in heat alone. We send our male to a kennel.

If you have a farm with actual kennels--in my mind anyway--that would be the only way to separate breeding dogs unless they are 100% supervised.

That being said, it always is a disappointment when people have accidental litters and sometimes it's tempting to think they may not have been accidental. But if we are to be civil to one another and continue to work together there simply must be exceptions to the rules. Certainly if a breeder does this repeatedly we would become suspicious. But nothing is black and white and while we all strive to do our best accidents still happen.

I do have to say that I disagree with puppies having to be DNA tested before going to breeding homes. And I personally do not differentiate between breeding quality and pet quality when I register the pups with the TDR. A pet quality dog may have a few faults--but that doesn't make him any less a Tamaskan! Take our most recent litter: they were so consistent and nice that the pup at the "bottom" still only had one structural fault. There were minor things going on...but to draw a line...I guess I just don't see the point. The way I do separate these pups is with their new owners. My contracts clearly state which pups are breeding quality and which must be fixed. Not everything has to be dictated by the TDR. Breeders can and will do the right thing on their own.
Tracy Graziano
http://www.hawthornetamaskan.com

bark as if no one can hear you
catch the ball on the fly
lick like there's no end to kissing
sleep on a sofa nearby
jump like the sky is the limit
sit by the fire with friends
stay with the ones who love you
run like the road never ends

User avatar
arianwenarie
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 1244
Joined: Wed May 19, 2010 5:07 pm
Location: USA

Re: NEW DOG/LITTER REGISTRATION SYSTEM

Post by arianwenarie » Sat Nov 02, 2013 7:49 pm

Hawthorne wrote:I do have to say that I disagree with puppies having to be DNA tested before going to breeding homes.
Is a new rule being discussed mandating breeders to have their litters DNA tested prior to going to breeding homes? If it's a mandatory test for a dog to be used for breeding, then that's a moot point if the dog doesn't pass other health tests. i.e. Breeder does a DNA test on pup X. At 2 years old, pup X fails his hip test. But he's already DNA profiled....waste of funds?? On the other hand, pup Y wasn't intended for a breeding home, but owner later decides to breed since she meets breed standards and has passing health tests. The owner does the last test - DNA profiling and registers as a breeder. Same result? A registered qualified breeding dog is DNA profiled. o_O
Hawthorne wrote:And I personally do not differentiate between breeding quality and pet quality when I register the pups with the TDR. A pet quality dog may have a few faults--but that doesn't make him any less a Tamaskan!
Of course not. But I can see how the current TDR registration can be interpreted as such. I don't know if my original post (recently) made any sense....that's why I wanted a bit more clarity on it. lol. :P

What about in the case a puppy has a major fault? Would he/she be considered pet quality or still considered potential breeding quality even with a major fault? i.e. blue eyes, liver color, piebald markings, floppy ears, long feathered fur, no mask, etc
Hawthorne wrote:There were minor things going on...but to draw a line...I guess I just don't see the point.
I'm confused...so you're saying there's no point in drawing a line on the registration of dogs (with breeding restrictions or not) irrespective of the severity of the fault? I'm not trying to incite a war or anything...merely trying to understand, though...bear with me - I am a rather blunt person when it comes to highly debatable topics. So, I offer my apologies right now (though perhaps a bit late... :oops: ). What if a puppy does not meet the breed standards (i.e. blue eyes, liver color, piebald markings, floppy ears, long feathered fur, etc) and the breeder decides not to place any breeding restrictions on the pup. That pup is then placed in a breeding home and passes all health tests. Since the pup only has faults and the severity of the faults can be seen objectively, then does this mean the pup's offspring will also be registered without breeding restrictions? Do note that I did not say the 2nd gen pups are not Tamaskan - they can still be given full registration (in terms of purebred or not).
Hawthorne wrote:Not everything has to be dictated by the TDR. Breeders can and will do the right thing on their own.
Again, of course not everything has to be dictated by the TDR. The TDR is trusting the breeders to make sound decisions on their own dogs and dogs their kennels produce. That's a good thing. However, in the case where a breeder disregards the breed standard and registers all their litters without breeding restrictions, isn't that an issue? I would assume the TDR would have to step in if that were the case...

User avatar
akaye531
Tamific (Novice)
Tamific (Novice)
Posts: 246
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 4:04 pm
Location: New Jersey

Online Show Results - October 2013

Post by akaye531 » Mon Nov 04, 2013 4:39 pm

Ryphen wrote:Out of curiosity, what would it take to register them?
I was told to send John Bannow a message on facebook asking for a DNA kit. From what I understanding, once they are DNA tested, they can be registered.

User avatar
Hawthorne
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 1817
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 11:07 pm
Location: Pennsylvania | USA
Contact:

Re: Online Show Results - October 2013

Post by Hawthorne » Mon Nov 04, 2013 7:55 pm

I thought to register dogs had to pass all health testing: hips, DM and also do a DNA parentage? Or is that just for breeding dogs?

Things are about to change in a big way for registering non-TDR dogs.

But that's off topic...

This is just an online / for fun show anyhow.
Tracy Graziano
http://www.hawthornetamaskan.com

bark as if no one can hear you
catch the ball on the fly
lick like there's no end to kissing
sleep on a sofa nearby
jump like the sky is the limit
sit by the fire with friends
stay with the ones who love you
run like the road never ends

User avatar
Ryphen
Tamific (Novice)
Tamific (Novice)
Posts: 261
Joined: Mon May 23, 2011 8:22 pm
Location: New York, USA

Re: Online Show Results - October 2013

Post by Ryphen » Mon Nov 04, 2013 10:16 pm

To me, it makes sense to require health testing if the dog is going to be breeding. Otherwise, a DNA test to prove lineage seems sufficient to say the dog is from TDR stock. However, I'll have to see what Katelyn and John say when I get the chance to ask them.

User avatar
Sylvaen
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 5202
Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 3:53 pm
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Contact:

Re: Online Show Results - October 2013

Post by Sylvaen » Mon Nov 04, 2013 11:58 pm

Neutered / spayed "pedigree" (with confirmed parentage) Tamaskan Dogs can be TDR registered with a DNA profile as proof of heritage. Intact dogs must be fully health tested first.
Image
The future lies before you, like a path of pure white snow...
Be careful how you tread it, for every step will show.

balto13
Tamtastic (Apprentice)
Tamtastic (Apprentice)
Posts: 439
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2013 3:40 am

Re: Online Show Results - October 2013

Post by balto13 » Tue Nov 05, 2013 12:33 am

I am assuming this convo will be moved to another topic (fair enough because it's going off topic) but I can't help but wonder, if DNA proof is all that is needed to register a tam than what makes TDR tams "better" to buy when a person can buy a non registered tam from Blustag (who still has some DNA profiled dogs) at a fraction of the cost? Sorry to ask this, but from an outside perspective that's how it would be seen, yes? I mean then the TDRs job is really just to hold records instead of set higher standards. I don't think only registered tams are the only dogs who deserve to be called tams, the same way a golden retriever from a pet store is still a golden retriever. However, I do not think the AKC would let me register, get papers and show said golden retriever (I could be wrong).

User avatar
Hawthorne
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 1817
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 11:07 pm
Location: Pennsylvania | USA
Contact:

Re: Online Show Results - October 2013

Post by Hawthorne » Tue Nov 05, 2013 1:36 am

Yes, you could register said Golden Retriever if he had a provable pedigree. BUT, you could not breed that Golden Retriever. AKC rules.

The whole purpose of not going after AKC recognition is so we can retain control over the breed: quality control. So yes, I at least feel it is the TDRs purpose to hold a higher standard. And some of the country clubs are making even more strict health testing rules. Bravo to them.

It all comes down to personal preference. To me, this is not like buying a pair of jeans. Or maybe it is: will you buy cheap jeans that chafe and wear out in 2 washings or will you spend some extra money to get jeans that are comfy, fit better and last 10 years? But seriously--we are not buying "stuff" which we will "own." These are living, breathing, sentient beings who deserve the very best start in life. If you visit a breeder and are not satisfied with the conditions or attention the pups receive, how is that a good start? If there are 4, 5, 6 litters on the ground at a breeders house at the same time how could they possibly be getting the attention they need? Would you pay for that? Would you support that? Money talks. If one chooses to spend their money without prior research just because one breeder is cheaper than another than shame on you! Go push that "buy now" button. :(
Tracy Graziano
http://www.hawthornetamaskan.com

bark as if no one can hear you
catch the ball on the fly
lick like there's no end to kissing
sleep on a sofa nearby
jump like the sky is the limit
sit by the fire with friends
stay with the ones who love you
run like the road never ends

balto13
Tamtastic (Apprentice)
Tamtastic (Apprentice)
Posts: 439
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2013 3:40 am

Re: Online Show Results - October 2013

Post by balto13 » Tue Nov 05, 2013 1:59 am

Hawthorne wrote:Yes, you could register said Golden Retriever if he had a provable pedigree. BUT, you could not breed that Golden Retriever. AKC rules.

The whole purpose of not going after AKC recognition is so we can retain control over the breed: quality control. So yes, I at least feel it is the TDRs purpose to hold a higher standard. And some of the country clubs are making even more strict health testing rules. Bravo to them.

It all comes down to personal preference. To me, this is not like buying a pair of jeans. Or maybe it is: will you buy cheap jeans that chafe and wear out in 2 washings or will you spend some extra money to get jeans that are comfy, fit better and last 10 years? But seriously--we are not buying "stuff" which we will "own." These are living, breathing, sentient beings who deserve the very best start in life. If you visit a breeder and are not satisfied with the conditions or attention the pups receive, how is that a good start? If there are 4, 5, 6 litters on the ground at a breeders house at the same time how could they possibly be getting the attention they need? Would you pay for that? Would you support that? Money talks. If one chooses to spend their money without prior research just because one breeder is cheaper than another than shame on you! Go push that "buy now" button. :(

I feel as if you're reading my post as if I, personally, would do this *sigh*. I, personally, never said there isn't a good reason to spend the money for a TDR dog. at.all ... I wish you wouldn't assume things of me :(

User avatar
HiTenshi16
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 4802
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 7:11 pm
Location: Princeton, TX US
Contact:

Re: Online Show Results - October 2013

Post by HiTenshi16 » Tue Nov 05, 2013 2:37 am

balto13 wrote:
Hawthorne wrote:Yes, you could register said Golden Retriever if he had a provable pedigree. BUT, you could not breed that Golden Retriever. AKC rules.

The whole purpose of not going after AKC recognition is so we can retain control over the breed: quality control. So yes, I at least feel it is the TDRs purpose to hold a higher standard. And some of the country clubs are making even more strict health testing rules. Bravo to them.

It all comes down to personal preference. To me, this is not like buying a pair of jeans. Or maybe it is: will you buy cheap jeans that chafe and wear out in 2 washings or will you spend some extra money to get jeans that are comfy, fit better and last 10 years? But seriously--we are not buying "stuff" which we will "own." These are living, breathing, sentient beings who deserve the very best start in life. If you visit a breeder and are not satisfied with the conditions or attention the pups receive, how is that a good start? If there are 4, 5, 6 litters on the ground at a breeders house at the same time how could they possibly be getting the attention they need? Would you pay for that? Would you support that? Money talks. If one chooses to spend their money without prior research just because one breeder is cheaper than another than shame on you! Go push that "buy now" button. :(

I feel as if you're reading my post as if I, personally, would do this *sigh*. I, personally, never said there isn't a good reason to spend the money for a TDR dog. at.all ... I wish you wouldn't assume things of me :(
The way I read it, it seemed like a general question to anyone as to why would they go to a cheaper breeder, not to assume you directly of someone who would do that.
Image

User avatar
Sylvaen
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 5202
Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 3:53 pm
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Contact:

Re: NEW DOG/LITTER REGISTRATION SYSTEM

Post by Sylvaen » Tue Nov 05, 2013 2:00 pm

arianwenarie wrote:
Hawthorne wrote:I do have to say that I disagree with puppies having to be DNA tested before going to breeding homes.
Is a new rule being discussed mandating breeders to have their litters DNA tested prior to going to breeding homes? If it's a mandatory test for a dog to be used for breeding, then that's a moot point if the dog doesn't pass other health tests. i.e. Breeder does a DNA test on pup X. At 2 years old, pup X fails his hip test. But he's already DNA profiled....waste of funds?? On the other hand, pup Y wasn't intended for a breeding home, but owner later decides to breed since she meets breed standards and has passing health tests. The owner does the last test - DNA profiling and registers as a breeder. Same result? A registered qualified breeding dog is DNA profiled. o_O
No, and it would be unreasonable to expect / demand all breeders to DNA test their puppies... even just the ones going to breeding homes. That being said, I am having ALL of my puppies DNA Profiled and DNA tested (DM, Wolf Hybrid test, and MyDogDNA Pass) regardless of whether they are going to breeding homes or not - this is just something I want to do and I don't really consider it to be a waste of funds, even though it will cost close to 3000 euros (for 7 puppies) in total. This is why my puppies cost slightly more than puppies from other breeders (1500 euros vs 1400 euros for puppies from German breeders, for instance) but much more is included in the price... it means less "profit" for me, but it also means more Tamaskan puppies that are fully health tested, which provides a more complete overall picture for the breed as a whole.
arianwenarie wrote:What about in the case a puppy has a major fault? Would he/she be considered pet quality or still considered potential breeding quality even with a major fault? i.e. blue eyes, liver color, piebald markings, floppy ears, long feathered fur, no mask, etc
This is why I do differentiate between breeding quality and pet quality... there might always be an extreme case (major fault) in which it would be unreasonable to expect someone to pay full price, though my pet quality (major fault) puppies come with a strict contract, which includes a mandatory spay/neuter clause - no exceptions. The rest of the puppies are all considered breeding quality (with the potential for future breeding) - perhaps some might have minor faults, compared to others, but this is why I carefully evaluate each puppy so that the best ones go to the homes that definitely WILL breed, compared to the homes that only really want a pet (even though they may change their mind at a later date). Only the puppies with serious / major faults (such as the ones you listed) are sold at a lower price as pets ONLY.
arianwenarie wrote:
Hawthorne wrote:Not everything has to be dictated by the TDR. Breeders can and will do the right thing on their own.
Again, of course not everything has to be dictated by the TDR. The TDR is trusting the breeders to make sound decisions on their own dogs and dogs their kennels produce. That's a good thing. However, in the case where a breeder disregards the breed standard and registers all their litters without breeding restrictions, isn't that an issue? I would assume the TDR would have to step in if that were the case...
I don't see why any breeder would knowingly or willingly disregard the breed standard - unless there was a really good reason for it (such as, for instance: perfect hips, fresh bloodline, etc... in which case health counts for more than a curly tail... it's all about weighing up the pros and cons). That being said, it isn't really in the breeder's best interest to purposefully disregard the breed standard without good reason... certainly it might seem like an easy "short term" solution to just get any Tamaskan and breed it, but when people see the resulting puppies the difference is obvious. In many ways, breeders are judged by the quality of the puppies they produce (health, temperament, appearance) so producing sub-par puppies would only be shooting yourself in the foot, especially if you have long-term goals in mind to become a reputable and well-respected breeder.
Image
The future lies before you, like a path of pure white snow...
Be careful how you tread it, for every step will show.

User avatar
Hawthorne
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 1817
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 11:07 pm
Location: Pennsylvania | USA
Contact:

Re: Online Show Results - October 2013

Post by Hawthorne » Thu Nov 07, 2013 10:46 pm

balto13 wrote:
Hawthorne wrote:Yes, you could register said Golden Retriever if he had a provable pedigree. BUT, you could not breed that Golden Retriever. AKC rules.

The whole purpose of not going after AKC recognition is so we can retain control over the breed: quality control. So yes, I at least feel it is the TDRs purpose to hold a higher standard. And some of the country clubs are making even more strict health testing rules. Bravo to them.

It all comes down to personal preference. To me, this is not like buying a pair of jeans. Or maybe it is: will you buy cheap jeans that chafe and wear out in 2 washings or will you spend some extra money to get jeans that are comfy, fit better and last 10 years? But seriously--we are not buying "stuff" which we will "own." These are living, breathing, sentient beings who deserve the very best start in life. If you visit a breeder and are not satisfied with the conditions or attention the pups receive, how is that a good start? If there are 4, 5, 6 litters on the ground at a breeders house at the same time how could they possibly be getting the attention they need? Would you pay for that? Would you support that? Money talks. If one chooses to spend their money without prior research just because one breeder is cheaper than another than shame on you! Go push that "buy now" button. :(

I feel as if you're reading my post as if I, personally, would do this *sigh*. I, personally, never said there isn't a good reason to spend the money for a TDR dog. at.all ... I wish you wouldn't assume things of me :(
This wasn't directed at you. I was responding to the general statement. I don't know you so I won't assume anything.
Tracy Graziano
http://www.hawthornetamaskan.com

bark as if no one can hear you
catch the ball on the fly
lick like there's no end to kissing
sleep on a sofa nearby
jump like the sky is the limit
sit by the fire with friends
stay with the ones who love you
run like the road never ends

User avatar
Hawthorne
Tamificent (Guru)
Tamificent (Guru)
Posts: 1817
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 11:07 pm
Location: Pennsylvania | USA
Contact:

Re: NEW DOG/LITTER REGISTRATION SYSTEM

Post by Hawthorne » Thu Nov 07, 2013 10:48 pm

Sylvaen wrote:
arianwenarie wrote:
Hawthorne wrote:I do have to say that I disagree with puppies having to be DNA tested before going to breeding homes.
Is a new rule being discussed mandating breeders to have their litters DNA tested prior to going to breeding homes? If it's a mandatory test for a dog to be used for breeding, then that's a moot point if the dog doesn't pass other health tests. i.e. Breeder does a DNA test on pup X. At 2 years old, pup X fails his hip test. But he's already DNA profiled....waste of funds?? On the other hand, pup Y wasn't intended for a breeding home, but owner later decides to breed since she meets breed standards and has passing health tests. The owner does the last test - DNA profiling and registers as a breeder. Same result? A registered qualified breeding dog is DNA profiled. o_O
No, and it would be unreasonable to expect / demand all breeders to DNA test their puppies... even just the ones going to breeding homes. That being said, I am having ALL of my puppies DNA Profiled and DNA tested (DM, Wolf Hybrid test, and MyDogDNA Pass) regardless of whether they are going to breeding homes or not - this is just something I want to do and I don't really consider it to be a waste of funds, even though it will cost close to 3000 euros (for 7 puppies) in total. This is why my puppies cost slightly more than puppies from other breeders (1500 euros vs 1400 euros for puppies from German breeders, for instance) but much more is included in the price... it means less "profit" for me, but it also means more Tamaskan puppies that are fully health tested, which provides a more complete overall picture for the breed as a whole.
That being said, I have to say that I have and do DM test puppies if they are not cleared by parentage. When I say DNA test I'm referring to the DNA Parentage testing. I DM tested the girls in the Yellowstone Litter, but the Pi Litter was cleared by parentage.
Tracy Graziano
http://www.hawthornetamaskan.com

bark as if no one can hear you
catch the ball on the fly
lick like there's no end to kissing
sleep on a sofa nearby
jump like the sky is the limit
sit by the fire with friends
stay with the ones who love you
run like the road never ends

Post Reply