Conditional Registration is an AKC thing Only

[bigoak]

I'm even seeing crossbred Vizsla's at the GSP trials,lots of white.I even saw one with four white feet! I guess if your going to run with the cheaters,You have to go with the flow.It's for the betterment of the breed ofcourse!

[hi-tailyn]

If we want to get serious about doing DNA and knowing what is actually on the pedigree. At least more so than it has been in the past.

What I have read is that Irish Setters must have DNA on file with AKC or AF to compete at Nats. So do most other breeds.

What the Irish Setters do beyond is they require Microchip of each of these dogs and they check each dog before they run at the Nats. Each dog has DNA and microchip on record to prevent running of wrong dog. Either unintentional or intentional. All this additional paperwork and rules just to slow down the very few Crooks out there.

Until we require DNA on all pups to be reg. or all dogs before they can reg. a litter, there will be those that play with their paperwork and slip in there a crossbred of some sort.

Again all this paperwork is just putting more $$$$$$ into AKC's Greedy Hands.

Scott

[jasonw99]

I wonder why the akc doesn't mandate DNA as part of the registration

[ultracarry]

Money. Can. You imagine how many people would not register the dog because if a 50 fee upon spending the money to buy the dog.... more money in numbers.

[Cajun Casey]

Money. Can. You imagine how many people would not register the dog because if a 50 fee upon spending the money to buy the dog.... more money in numbers.

????????

[jasonw99]

after reading 4 pages of posts a couple comments.

crossbreeding to get a q. if u knowingly cross breed and call it a purebred you are banned from breeding for x many years. it's on the akc page look it up.

the q was designed for the dog that produced hundreds of dogs ie rusty. if they found that rusty was half pointer would it be ok to pull the wins and registrations away from ANY dog that has rusty in it's pedigree no matter how far back? including the fc you own now?

the current rules are if your dog has bred x amount of litters it must be dnad. there are rules in place to prevent crossbreeding from happening. yes any rule can be broken.
you have to have a clause to cover the dogs created prior to the new DNA rules being implemented. the q fits that.
after about ten years or so the q should disappear

[ultracarry]

Money. Can. You imagine how many people would not register the dog because if a 50 fee upon spending the money to buy the dog.... more money in numbers.

????????

Yes Casey I can explain. Since you usually need an examination for a simple statement. Due to the amount of money people spend on a dog it becomes pricey when you add an additional $30-$35 (dna prepaid or not) to the $20 fee the AKC already charges to register a dog. When a lot of people just fix the animal when they bring it home.

Wonder why they banned you from another site???

[ezzy333]

Jkh, if you are happy with an 80/90 Lbs. dog that hunts with his nose on the ground, points every mouse in the field, is tripping over is tongue after 15 minutes, points like a wet rag, will not leave your feet, takes all day to retrieve a bird out of cold water, is more interested in chasing fur than pointing a bird, hey man there are plenty of what they call a poor man’s hunting dog out there. This will have no effect on you or your dog. If you want to go back to living in a cave, hunt to eat, and walk to everywhere you want to go, man, go for it, just don’t forget to turn off the computer before you leave. But some of us have moved into the modern age, but no one is telling you that you have to and don’t you dare tell me and others that we have to go back to ancient times.

I admit I like the modern dogs better than the German dog but that does not give anyone the excuse to cross breed. If you can't find or breed the type of dog you like in the GSP's then get the breed you like which appears to be a pointer. Both breeds are excellent dogs but they are different. But as long as we try to make all of our trial dogs hunt like a pointer and judge them against a pointer standard then we will never maintain any breed character or breed standards. I know a lot of you think you are right and what you like is what all of us are supposed to like but we have as much right to complain about what is happening within our breeds as anyone else.

If I was still in that cave you like then I might just breed anything to anything but I left that position many years ago when I saw what trialers and show people were guilty, equally guilty of and that is breeding what you like to play your games with and forgetting what the individual breeds were all about. If we want them all to hunt the same and don't care if they even look like the breed they supposedly represent we have no need for different breeds and soon won't.

There is a reason we have different breeds with different standards. We are lucky enough to have had ancestors that delivered those breeds to us, But we may be the last generation to have had that opportunity. Sounds that way if something isn't done to control the people who have egos that outweigh those standards. I agree with what we know today we need to just start from here and use the DNA tests and do a better job of enforcing breed standards.

Ezzy

[shags]

If I was still in that cave you like then I might just breed anything to anything but I left that position many years ago when I saw what trialers and show people were guilty, equally guilty of and that is breeding what you like to play your games with and forgetting what the individual breeds were all about. If we want them all to hunt the same and don't care if they even look like the breed they supposedly represent we have no need for different breeds and soon won't.

There is a reason we have different breeds with different standards. We are lucky enough to have had ancestors that delivered those breeds to us, But we may be the last generation to have had that opportunity. Sounds that way if something isn't done to control the people who have egos that outweigh those standards. I agree with what we know today we need to just start from here and use the DNA tests and do a better job of enforcing breed standards.

Ezzy

As long as performance venues have one performance standard applicable to all participants, there's going to be an issue with a certain breed or look being the model of performance. The only way to differentiate the performance standard by breed is to close down competition to specific breeds and choose organizers and judges from within that breed so that everyone's opinions more or less line up.

[jasonw99]

just remember this whole topic came up about a dog who's grand sire is in question. there was deception by the current owners. there should be a grandfather clause and u r worrying about the past too much. half the theories on here are so uninformed.

there isn't pointer cross breeding going on. the q is not made for crossbreeding it's to not disqualify the entire breed. it's illegal to register a dog under a lie.

just let this subject go. don't turn this breed into the other diluted breeds. not going to mention the breed. v

and don't think u or you is better than the other

[ElhewPointer]

If I was still in that cave you like then I might just breed anything to anything but I left that position many years ago when I saw what trialers and show people were guilty, equally guilty of and that is breeding what you like to play your games with and forgetting what the individual breeds were all about. If we want them all to hunt the same and don't care if they even look like the breed they supposedly represent we have no need for different breeds and soon won't.

There is a reason we have different breeds with different standards. We are lucky enough to have had ancestors that delivered those breeds to us, But we may be the last generation to have had that opportunity. Sounds that way if something isn't done to control the people who have egos that outweigh those standards. I agree with what we know today we need to just start from here and use the DNA tests and do a better job of enforcing breed standards.

Ezzy

As long as performance venues have one performance standard applicable to all participants, there's going to be an issue with a certain breed or look being the model of performance. The only way to differentiate the performance standard by breed is to close down competition to specific breeds and choose organizers and judges from within that breed so that everyone's opinions more or less line up.

Shags,

Very good points.

[solon]

I presented earlier some links on articles by geneticists that contend that closed stud books and a eugenic emphasis on complete purity is not a good thing for a breed. The gene pool has nowhere to go but down, to less diversity and probably an increase in frequency of disease trait alleles. Naturally the registries make rules to enforce breed purity, because after all they make their money registering pure bred dogs. DNA testing for parentage just makes for better enforcement of purity. Not only that, the registries restrict the competitions they sponsor to registered dogs. I guess sled dog racing would be an exception. In some respects, the tests and competitions define the performance traits of the breed. Thus a horseback GSP may be a different dog than a NAVHDA VC GSP or a high scoring VGP dog. The geneticist would say, good! Such diversity benefits the breed.

So let me propose a thought experiment. Let us say for the sake of argument that the Wesslpointer

http://www.wesslpointer.com/

starts whipping the GSP at all their games as they become more numerous. Not that this is true or will be true, I have seen little evidence for it yet

So we might conclude that there would be some allele combinations in the Wesslpointer (which has a lot of GSP in it) that might benefit the GSP. Should the registry stand in the way of experimental cross breeding to improve the GSP or should they have a way to make that possible, like when the Irish Red Setter was developed?

The reason the AKC Irish Setter folks want DNA is because they don't want a Red Setter look alike coming in to their trials and whipping their butts!

The truthfulness of pedigrees is a separate issue and should be adhered to. I guess you can tell I don't like the eugenics policies.

Solon

[shags]

The reason the AKC Irish Setter folks want DNA is because they don't want a Red Setter look alike coming in to their trials and whipping their butts! Solon

No, that is not true. AKC is moving toward all the breed national championships demanding DNA and chips. ISCA was among the first, if not the first, to implement it.
Red setters which are akc registered have competed and won the Irish Setter NCs. However, many red setter breeders stopped registering with akc decades ago, and are now shut out on the repricosity issue. Most of the Irish field people would welcome the reds, but the vast majority of ISCA members are bench folks who pretty much as a whole waged a huge campaign to ban the reds. There are some red setter folks who remain adamant about keeping separate as well, so it's not one-sided. Would you say they are afraid of getting their butts kicked? I've seen some dual registered red setters run, that did get their butts kicked so it goes both ways
There are people on both sides who realize that allowing repricosity would widen and improve both gene pools. Every single Irish Setter field person that I know, with competitive dogs, runs allbreed trials against all comers, and to me that shows they aren't afraid of competition. Some run AF P/S trials, not dual-sanctioned restricted breed trials, as well.
The Irish Setter field folks are no different from those in the other breeds - if they don't like crossbreeding it's because it's done in secret and muddies pedigrees. When Le Grande did the ES cross 60 years ago it was done openly and people knew what was behind those dogs, unlike today when God knows what is mixed in and only God knows what will be produced further down the line.

[ezzy333]

Solon, Your point is interesting but in practicality is not true. Our closed stud books have allowed us to change, improve, or make things worse for the past 100 years or more. There is no need to go outside of your breed to find diversity in the breed.

And the biggest stumbling block is who decides what is an improvement? If it is a group that is only interested in one aspect of a dog such as conformation or performanbce then we have already lost. In actuallity we already have that group and it is us.

Ezzy

[solon]

Shags, Thanks for the correction and additional details on the Irish/Red setter story. I guess I was only familiar with the FDSB Red Setter part of the equation.

It is clear that the GSP has way more than a minimum effective breeding population, although the breed might have some problem with the popular sire syndrome.

With regards to who determines and how what is an improvement in a breed, I suspect the answer is it is the market. How do the dogs of a given line or breed satisfy the buyers of those animals, who use them for their own various purposes. Whether that is hunting, trialing, testing, show, or just companions. The registries in a way try to impose a monopoly on this market. Since dog owners are such a diversified group, and even 400 different breeds might not satisfy everyone, then I see a need to diversify within a breed, at least in some breeds, or create new breeds from existing stock.

ezzy333, "You say there is no need to go outside of your breed to find diversity in the breed." That depends on the breed. Likely true for the modern GSP. There are some breeds that are descended from as few as 4 founder animals. Such breeds are extremely inbred and likely to have high rates of heritable diseases. When you look at OFA stats for example, how did the Boykin Spaniel have so much hip dysplasia, around 50% in the past, and now it has been improved to 34% as of 2010? Such high rates are very unacceptable and it good that they have improved. Keeping in mind that the OFA measurements of HD rates are an underestimate as they don't include the bad films that are never submitted.

I certainly agree with everyone else, that there is no place for cheating and dishonesty in pedigrees. Some may feel forced to do that though, because good dogs would be excluded on not being pure enough, where purity starts at a certain date and from then on, no new genes allowed. The discredited eugenics movement brought this on 100 years ago and we are still paying the price. It is just racism and is Darwinian, but we can reason against it.

Solon

Solon

[Cajun Casey]

Shags, Thanks for the correction and additional details on the Irish/Red setter story. I guess I was only familiar with the FDSB Red Setter part of the equation.

It is clear that the GSP has way more than a minimum effective breeding population, although the breed might have some problem with the popular sire syndrome.

With regards to who determines and how what is an improvement in a breed, I suspect the answer is it is the market. How do the dogs of a given line or breed satisfy the buyers of those animals, who use them for their own various purposes. Whether that is hunting, trialing, testing, show, or just companions. The registries in a way try to impose a monopoly on this market. Since dog owners are such a diversified group, and even 400 different breeds might not satisfy everyone, then I see a need to diversify within a breed, at least in some breeds, or create new breeds from existing stock.

ezzy333, "You say there is no need to go outside of your breed to find diversity in the breed." That depends on the breed. Likely true for the modern GSP. There are some breeds that are descended from as few as 4 founder animals. Such breeds are extremely inbred and likely to have high rates of heritable diseases. When you look at OFA stats for example, how did the Boykin Spaniel have so much hip dysplasia, around 50% in the past, and now it has been improved to 34% as of 2010? Such high rates are very unacceptable and it good that they have improved. Keeping in mind that the OFA measurements of HD rates are an underestimate as they don't include the bad films that are never submitted.

I certainly agree with everyone else, that there is no place for cheating and dishonesty in pedigrees. Some may feel forced to do that though, because good dogs would be excluded on not being pure enough, where purity starts at a certain date and from then on, no new genes allowed. The discredited eugenics movement brought this on 100 years ago and we are still paying the price. It is just racism and is Darwinian, but we can reason against it.

Solon

Solon

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m ... in;content

As far as a decrease in percentages of any breed for hip displaysia, the trend is to not do a final and report on dogs that have a poor preliminary finding. Hopefully, they are not bred to pass along the disorder, but that is not always the case.

[solon]

Interesting link Casey. Some of Plato's ideas had some long lasting and nasty consequences for Western thought.

Solon

[Cajun Casey]

Interesting link Casey. Some of Plato's ideas had some long lasting and nasty consequences for Western thought.

Solon

Gould was one of my favorites and that is probably my second favorite essay of his, behind the one on the demise of the .500 hitter in baseball. He and his great opponent on evolutionary process, Ed Wilson have contributed so much to so many disciplines. But, I must say I agree, in some cases, that three generations of idiots is enough!

[jasonw99]

there isn't pointer cross breeding going on.

Not true, A field trialer was caught a couple 3 yrs. ago crossing his FT GSP female to a male EP.

my point exactly the DNA program caught it. you can not intentionally cross breed and get away with it. the q is like a grandfather clause it is not a way for u to cross breed and get away with it. it's a grand father clause for the dogs that were welped prior to the DNA mandates.

[jasonw99]

yes and the only way it could be proved would be DNA. don't kid ur selves this went on for years and years. a shorthair that throws dogs with white ears or heads has some pointer in it.

the original point of the post was in regards to the q. the q was created as a grandfather clause not as a tool to allow crossbreeding.

[remmy]

yes and the only way it could be proved would be DNA. don't kid ur selves this went on for years and years. a shorthair that throws dogs with white ears or heads has some pointer in it.

the original point of the post was in regards to the q. the q was created as a grandfather clause not as a tool to allow crossbreeding.

If someone didn't drop a dime this wouldn't be an issue right now.

How is the q a grandfather clause? One dog, mentioned in a previous post, had a questionable grand sire. So now, AKC changed this dog to a q registration and is possibly going to have his recent National titles stripped by NGSPA. How is that a grandfather clause? A grandfather clause would leave that dog alone and start the q with future pups from a certain point on. As it is now with the q system, it is allowing crossbreeding to happen without getting punished. In three generations the q will be removed and you have a purebreed again.

Of course it has gone on for years, no one is debating that. What everyone is debating is that AKC needs to change this new q system to leave dogs alone that are currently registered and start the q for dogs whelped after a certain date. That is a true grandfather clause.

[jasonw99]

while I agree with you the way I interpret the q system is it only applies to dogs that are effected by generations back. technically the q registration should end assuming they don't find out one of the major producers is not a shorthair if I go breed a dog to a pointer and say it's a shorthair and the DNA doesn't match I believe they will bar the dog not give then a q and I will be disciplined I will call the akc when I have a chance to get an interpretation.

the whole situation with the dog mentioned sounds like a witch hunt to me. I don't agree with any of it.

[fuzznut]

All of our complaints will stop the Q dogs from competing, but will not stop them from the registration process. It is not only trial dogs, nor GSPs involved with this.... all breeds. Imports and dogs bred here are involved.

Guess stopping them from competing is what everyone was after... I think you are going to get your wish.
Fuzz

[remmy]

DNA can only confirm who the sire/dam is, grand sire/dam and so on, based on the information you provide them of the pedigree. It cannot determine if the sire was a pointer or not. Hence, if the DNA does not match who you said it should then the AKC gives it a q registration.They will not bar it. This is the whole concept of this q system.

[kninebirddog]

All of our complaints will stop the Q dogs from competing, but will not stop them from the registration process. It is not only trial dogs, nor GSPs involved with this.... all breeds. Imports and dogs bred here are involved.

Guess stopping them from competing is what everyone was after... I think you are going to get your wish.
Fuzz

My entire point of this post was If you have a "Q" dog stick to AKC events as other registries do not accept them. As for the rest it grew a life of it's own

Stock foundation is something different ......

[shags]

A Q doesn't necessarily mean a dog is crossbred, just that one of it's parents isn't who it says it is on the papers.

Gotta wonder if AKC isn't looking at the possibility of lawsuits - for taking peoples' registration fees then years and litters later, taking them away. A frequently used stud could produce dozens of litters and hundreds of puppies and that would mean a lot of PO'ed innocent owners getting their dogs tossed.

[ACooper]

A Q doesn't necessarily mean a dog is crossbred, just that one of it's parents isn't who it says it is on the papers.

Gotta wonder if AKC isn't looking at the possibility of lawsuits - for taking peoples' registration fees then years and litters later, taking them away. A frequently used stud could produce dozens of litters and hundreds of puppies and that would mean a lot of PO'ed innocent owners getting their dogs tossed.

Doesn't mean it may not be the right thing to do. Gotta draw a line in the sand somewhere.

[jasonw99]

the other important thing to consider is If u wanted to crossbreed. why would you use a pointer that has been DNA? I would just go to a plantation somewhere and find one that hasn't been dnad. I would never get a q. you are worrying about something that doesn't really prevent it from happening there are always ways around the system. to me it's too much effort and not ethical but to someone I'm sure it's worth their time? I personally don't see a need to do it in a gsp.

good discussion though

[nikegundog]

the other important thing to consider is If u wanted to crossbreed. why would you use a pointer that has been DNA? I would just go to a plantation somewhere and find one that hasn't been dnad. I would never get a q. you are worrying about something that doesn't really prevent it from happening there are always ways around the system. to me it's too much effort and not ethical but to someone I'm sure it's worth their time? I personally don't see a need to do it in a gsp.

good discussion though

I don't think financially it feasibly, but a DNA data base would eliminate exactly what you are talking about. If a pups DNA didn't match the Dam/Sire DNA in the database it gets booted and the breeder is suspended for life. You then don't get a Q. you get a pup that can never get registered and a life lesson.

[ACooper]

the other important thing to consider is If u wanted to crossbreed. why would you use a pointer that has been DNA? I would just go to a plantation somewhere and find one that hasn't been dnad. I would never get a q. you are worrying about something that doesn't really prevent it from happening there are always ways around the system. to me it's too much effort and not ethical but to someone I'm sure it's worth their time? I personally don't see a need to do it in a gsp.

good discussion though

You could still get a q, you would have to pick a GSP sire for the paperwork, if it ever came to question and DNA could not be submitted for the "papers" sire because he is dead and buried somewhere out on the prairies and no one can remember where, then you get a Q.

[RayGubernat]

The reason the AKC Irish Setter folks want DNA is because they don't want a Red Setter look alike coming in to their trials and whipping their butts! Solon

No, that is not true. AKC is moving toward all the breed national championships demanding DNA and chips. ISCA was among the first, if not the first, to implement it.
Red setters which are akc registered have competed and won the Irish Setter NCs. However, many red setter breeders stopped registering with akc decades ago, and are now shut out on the repricosity issue. Most of the Irish field people would welcome the reds, but the vast majority of ISCA members are bench folks who pretty much as a whole waged a huge campaign to ban the reds. There are some red setter folks who remain adamant about keeping separate as well, so it's not one-sided. Would you say they are afraid of getting their butts kicked? I've seen some dual registered red setters run, that did get their butts kicked so it goes both ways
There are people on both sides who realize that allowing repricosity would widen and improve both gene pools. Every single Irish Setter field person that I know, with competitive dogs, runs allbreed trials against all comers, and to me that shows they aren't afraid of competition. Some run AF P/S trials, not dual-sanctioned restricted breed trials, as well.
The Irish Setter field folks are no different from those in the other breeds - if they don't like crossbreeding it's because it's done in secret and muddies pedigrees. When Le Grande did the ES cross 60 years ago it was done openly and people knew what was behind those dogs, unlike today when God knows what is mixed in and only God knows what will be produced further down the line.

Shags -

I gotta disagree with you on this one. The ISCA does not want red setters in there because they make their bench bred half Afghan hound Irish Setters look pretty pathetic in the field. You gotta know that they crossed irish setters with something to get all that hair. That breed went south in a matter of ten years or so. Too fast for anything but crossbreeding. Sheesh. Some of those show dogs look like wooly mammoths. They run about the same too. I wonder how many ISCA bench type Irish seters would have Q registrations if there was some way to differentiate hound crossbreeding.

RayG

[shags]

The reason the AKC Irish Setter folks want DNA is because they don't want a Red Setter look alike coming in to their trials and whipping their butts! Solon

No, that is not true. AKC is moving toward all the breed national championships demanding DNA and chips. ISCA was among the first, if not the first, to implement it.
Red setters which are akc registered have competed and won the Irish Setter NCs. However, many red setter breeders stopped registering with akc decades ago, and are now shut out on the repricosity issue. Most of the Irish field people would welcome the reds, but the vast majority of ISCA members are bench folks who pretty much as a whole waged a huge campaign to ban the reds. There are some red setter folks who remain adamant about keeping separate as well, so it's not one-sided. Would you say they are afraid of getting their butts kicked? I've seen some dual registered red setters run, that did get their butts kicked so it goes both ways
There are people on both sides who realize that allowing repricosity would widen and improve both gene pools. Every single Irish Setter field person that I know, with competitive dogs, runs allbreed trials against all comers, and to me that shows they aren't afraid of competition. Some run AF P/S trials, not dual-sanctioned restricted breed trials, as well.
The Irish Setter field folks are no different from those in the other breeds - if they don't like crossbreeding it's because it's done in secret and muddies pedigrees. When Le Grande did the ES cross 60 years ago it was done openly and people knew what was behind those dogs, unlike today when God knows what is mixed in and only God knows what will be produced further down the line.

Shags -

I gotta disagree with you on this one. The ISCA does not want red setters in there because they make their bench bred half Afghan hound Irish Setters look pretty pathetic in the field. You gotta know that they crossed irish setters with something to get all that hair. That breed went south in a matter of ten years or so. Too fast for anything but crossbreeding. Sheesh. Some of those show dogs look like wooly mammoths. They run about the same too. I wonder how many ISCA bench type Irish seters would have Q registrations if there was some way to differentiate hound crossbreeding.

RayG

Ray, Isn't that what I wrote above? Some of what you see at akc trials at Petersburg or maybe Summerduck is not representative of the field-bred Irish in other areas of the country. If you were aware of the arguments over repricosity a few years back you'd know that the majority of the IS field community favored allowing red setters in, and that the bench folks were against it. The last time I ran numbers, the field folks were about 10% of the isca membership so their votes didn't amount to much. If you reread above, you'll notice that I mentioned it was the bench folks that mounted the opposition. And when I say field folks, I mean the ones who show up and compete at the IS national championships, who compete and win in all breed trials, and have success in finshing their dogs, not the folks who run occasionally in restricted stakes at small local trials.
As you must know, there are some red setter breeders that continue to outcross to esetters and pointers for whatever reason. It's pretty much openly discussed if you know who to ask. I can't disagree with with anyone, bench or field, who opposes crossbreeding done on the sly, that is, faking the pedigrees. Not being honest with what is behind a dog doesn't improve breeding down the line. When you hear that an Irish Setter person backs DNA requirements, it's not always because they are afraid of competition - it could also be that they would like to uphold honest breeding practices just the same as other akc breed fanciers do.

[hi-tailyn]

the other important thing to consider is If u wanted to crossbreed. why would you use a pointer that has been DNA? I would just go to a plantation somewhere and find one that hasn't been dnad. I would never get a q. you are worrying about something that doesn't really prevent it from happening there are always ways around the system. to me it's too much effort and not ethical but to someone I'm sure it's worth their time? I personally don't see a need to do it in a gsp.

What I learned from one of the best Father/Son crook teams is It doesn't matter if the actual sire is DNA'd or not. If you say the sire is a non DNA'd sire then there is nothing to compare the pup DNA to. :roll: Thus no questions from AKC or AF. AKC doesn't do a random search through all its DNA files to see if there is something else that matches the unknown puppy or dog DNA. Whether another GSP or crossbreed. You now have a purebred reg. dog without this "Q" in their pedigree.

Until you are required to DNA each litter to be able to reg. with AKC or AF the cheaters will mess up what is actually in the pedigrees.

if u knowingly cross breed and call it a purebred you are banned from breeding for x many years. it's on the akc page look it up.

AKC disqualified 2 litters in 3 years from these guys. They didn't get kicked out. A crook will never tell you the truth. It is always a accident.

We require DNA on file to run at the Nationals. We should to prove that the dog is who is drawn to run, we need to Microchip and verify the Microchip in each dog before they can run. Its the only real way to verify who is winning at our National events. I know of several dogs that were finished with another one of their dogs. Also seeing a dog fail miserably for a season or two at retrieving, then in two weeks later win two stakes and is said to have fantastic retrieve work. :roll: :roll:

Scott