So now I hear that people are hating on the American Pet registry, which freaks me out because my dog just happens to be registered there. They say that it is a sure sign of bad breeders and puppy mills, and that AKC is a much better standard......but now here is the odd part.. ..people also say that AKC is also associated with puppy mills as of late.

I mean I know my girl came from a breeder near my area. I really don't think any pet registry can in force good breeding practices to it's breeders and certainly can't tell you if your getting a healthy dog from a breeder that uses it's registry.


It still worries me that people are telling me my girl is somewhat "defective" because of her "undesirable" registration.   

In my opinion, just my opinion, registration is useless for most dogs and means nothing unless you are going to show. Registration doesn't mean you have a quality dog nor, a bad quality dog and I think both can come from any register since no register goes out and inspects the dogs for quality before issuing papers. All you're getting is lineage proof, not proof of ethical or proper breeding throughout that line. A great registered dog can produce a bad line if not bred with a dog that will compliment them, then that bad line gets registration automatically whether quality or not. Certain registers may be easier to get into and thus get a bad reputation for having lower than average quality, but that doesn't mean you have a bad dog. To me, register snobbing is similar to brand snobbing. AKC and UKC get televised so they must be primo but they all have their faults. I wouldn't worry too much about the people hating on your register and just love your girl for who she is.

That's just my logical insight of it. People that show I'm sure could give you more facts and such as to why AKC might be better or worse than APR or UKC and so on and so forth.

The thing to consider about many of these lesser registries is it's pretty much a guarantee the breeder isn't doing anything with their dogs beyond breeding them. That would be my first thought- Given they aren't doing anything to prove their dogs it's probably safe to assume they aren't genetically health testing their breeding stock either....the other thought I would offer is often dogs are registered under scam registries to dodge obligations of spay/neuter contracts they themselves may have signed when they purchased their pup....

No, being AKC doesn't magically guarantee health, quality, or functionality of the end product. But that is why breeder/buyer education is so important. There are bad breeders in every registry....knowing how to pick up on the red flags and how to research your breeders is a key point of being a responsible buyer.

In my opinion and what I have seen/experienced.

A breeder that is NOT AKC is not breeding for the right reason, but just because a breeder is AKC doesn't mean it automatically is good.

A good breeder registers with AKC but an AKC registration does not mean a good breeder.

Kind of like a good doctor has an MD, but an MD does not automatically mean they are a good doctor.

Okay, registration is important. Yes, the majority of people will not be showing their dogs, but it still allows you to have clear records of parents and breeder info...god forbid something happens and you need to trace it to the lines of the dog.

I'll say, Canadian kennel club, American kennel club, and united kennel club are three registries I recognize as decent. More importantly, get to know your breeder. Make sure they do their health testing, take care of their dogs, participate in breed specific activities.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter what we say. - it matters who the breeder is.

Thanks for the advice. APR does have dog shows, but AKC probably has a lot more....so maybe any good lines that are in APR just don't get shown as often and probably don't get the credit they deserve or don't deserve for that matter. That and of course people would trust older registries more than newer ones.

The APR website hasn't even updated their dog show info since 2012, and all those links are dead. I think that's a pretty good indication of where their priorities are NOT.

If you want to trust that your dog's lineage is what the breeder claims it is, AKC is the most trustworthy. I don't even trust UKC (unless it is dual reg with AKC or another country's equivalent) because they don't honor AKC's limited registration.

yeah I can see why AKC is a much more reliable reg. If I ever get another dog I will look for one that registers with them, but since I got a second hand dog I can't complain.