AKC - DOES IT MEAN QUALITY OR ACCURACY?

Based on my experiences I have come to the conclusion that an an AKC registered dog is neither a sign of quality or accuracy.

APPARENTLY I AM NOT THE ONLY ONE

WHY YOU MIGHT ASK?

  1. AKC DOES NOT REQUIRE HEALTH TESTING FOR REGISTRATION

  2. AKC DOES NOT REQUIRE MICRO CHIPPING FOR REGISTRATION

  3. AKC DOES NOT REQUIRE DNA ON FILE FOR REGISTRATION

  4. AKC DID NOT EVEN REQUIRE MY FRIEND'S SIGNATURE ON A LITTER APPLICATION

  5. IF YOU WANT TO DISPUTE A PEDIGREE, YOU HAVE TO BEG THE AKC TO VERIFY IT AND PAY THEM A $500.00 FEE.

WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR YOU?

  1. YOU HAVE NO TEST RESULTS TO SHOW THAT YOUR DOG COULD BE LIKELY TO DEVELOP A GENETIC DISORDER.

  2. YOU HAVE NO GUARANTEE THAT YOUR PUPPY'S PARENTS ARE REALLY THE PARENTS.

  3. YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS AS AN OWNER. THE AKC SAYS IT DOES NOT DETERMINE OWNERSHIP BUT IN THE CASE OF MY FRIEND IT APPEARS THE AKC DID DETERMINE OWNERSHIP BY REGISTERING A LITTER TO HIS STUD DOG (HE WAS THE OWNER OF RECORD) WITHOUT HIS KNOWLEDGE, PERMISSION, OR SIGNATURE. THIS SHOULD BE OF CONCERN FOR ANYBODY AS THIS WOULD ALLOW ANYBODY TO STEAL YOUR DOG, REGISTER IT WITHOUT YOUR KNOWLEDGE AND THERE BY GIVING YOU NO RECOURSE TO RETRIEVE YOUR DOG.

SO ONE WOULD HAVE TO ASK; WHAT DO YOU GET FOR YOUR REGISTRATION DOLLARS? IT IS NO GUARANTEE YOUR DOG WILL BE HEALTHY. IT IS NO GUARANTEE THAT THE PARENTS ARE CORRECT. IT IS NO GUARANTEE THAT YOUR DOG IS PUREBRED. YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS AS AN OWNER.

EVEN THOUGH THE UKC DOES NOT REQUIRE HEALTH TESTING, DNA, OR A MICRO CHIP; IT DOES REQUIRE THE OWNER'S SIGNATURE IN A TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP AND THEY ACTUALLY VERIFY IT. IT ALSO STATES ON THE REGISTRATION PAPERWORK THAT IT IS A "LEGAL" DOCUMENT. AN AKC REGISTRATION MERELY STATES IT IS JUST AN "IMPORTANT" DOCUMENT. UKC REQUIRES THAT THE OWNER SHOWS THEIR OWN DOG UNLIKE THE AKC WHERE IN MANY CASES AS I AND OTHERS BELIEVE "CHAMPIONSHIPS" CAN BE BOUGHT WITH POLITICALLY CONNECTED "HANDLERS".