# can a gccf registered breeder



## Taylorbaby (Jan 10, 2009)

Advertise their registered active stud to non registered girls?

Just to save me looking it up, my laptop is playing up and the website wont load for me to look! I Just noticed 2 registered breeders, 1 is offering their older boy to non papered girls for a limited time only! The other just sold her non registered girls all un-neutered after breeding them as she now has registered cats, but is offering her boy to un-registered girls.

I didn't think this was allowed? 

Also noticed a huge rise in un-registered studs, one boasting that he sired 15 litters last year


----------



## gskinner123 (Mar 10, 2010)

Yes, they can. It's non-active registered GCCF queens that the stud owner may not accept into stud.


----------



## Time flies (Jul 23, 2013)

I'm not sure but I have noticed the same thing. Also I've noticed that there are so many advert for active reg girls who are mostly around 8/9 months. I thought this was quite strange. I saw a nice girl who I would have been quite tempted with because she looked nice, was a colour I would love and out of a grand champ stud who I admire but unless I knew the breeder I would be a bit wary of buying an older girl. I suppose it could just be because the breeders keep a girl back to see how she turns out and if she's going to be suitable for them maybe. 
Sorry Taylorbaby, I've gone off subject. I would have thought it wouldn't be allowed but I'm interested to know now!


----------



## Taylorbaby (Jan 10, 2009)

gskinner123 said:


> Yes, they can. It's non-active registered GCCF queens that the stud owner may not accept into stud.


yes sorry I mean they are not registered at all? so they can? just not non-active girls they cant? 



Time flies said:


> I'm not sure but I have noticed the same thing. Also I've noticed that there are so many advert for active reg girls who are mostly around 8/9 months. I thought this was quite strange. I saw a nice girl who I would have been quite tempted with because she looked nice, was a colour I would love and out of a grand champ stud who I admire but unless I knew the breeder I would be a bit wary of buying an older girl. I suppose it could just be because the breeders keep a girl back to see how she turns out and if she's going to be suitable for them maybe.
> Sorry Taylorbaby, I've gone off subject. I would have thought it wouldn't be allowed but I'm interested to know now!


lol that's ok!! I have seen a few like that, maybe people giving up, I wouldn't buy a older girl, been burnt before, plus I like to raise mine from kittens and get to know them!  But could just be then ran a couple on?


----------



## gskinner123 (Mar 10, 2010)

Taylorbaby said:


> yes sorry I mean they are not registered at all? so they can? just not non-active girls they cant?


Yes, that's it exactly. Can accept queens that are not registered; cannot accept non-active GCCF registered queens. Nor, of course, queens registered with other governing bodies where they have been endorsed 'not for breeding'.


----------



## lisajjl1 (Jun 23, 2010)

Taylorbaby said:


> yes sorry I mean they are not registered at all? so they can? just not non-active girls they cant?
> 
> Ethically, who would want to take in an un registered girl and who would think this is ok in any circumstance.
> 
> ...


----------



## OrientalSlave (Jan 26, 2012)

The GCCF need to get a grip and make this not allowed.


----------



## Time flies (Jul 23, 2013)

Wonder how they would know though, if someone said their GCCF non active reg cat wasn't registered.


----------



## OrientalSlave (Jan 26, 2012)

They don't but if there's a bar on all queens except those registered for breeding then that lie might be less likely to get a mating. Of course there are always the greedy and unscrupulous.


----------



## gskinner123 (Mar 10, 2010)

GCCF simply cannot apply rules where a cat (the queen) is not registered with them at all - if the cat is not registered, there ARE no rules to be bound by. But I agree, it would seem to be a loophole and I can think of only very, very limited circumstances where this might occur in a 'legitimate' manner.


----------



## OrientalSlave (Jan 26, 2012)

The way I look at it they are applying rules where the stud IS registered with them. After all you could take the view they can't apply rules where the queen isn't registered with them how come it's OK to take a female registered (say) with TICA?


----------



## lisajjl1 (Jun 23, 2010)

Time flies said:


> Wonder how they would know though, if someone said their GCCF non active reg cat wasn't registered.


I would suspect this happens as a matter of course if a stud is advertised as being available to unregistered girls why would someone confess to their girl being non active if just denying any knowledge of paperwork at all will get you in.


----------



## gskinner123 (Mar 10, 2010)

OrientalSlave said:


> The way I look at it they are applying rules where the stud IS registered with them. After all you could take the view they can't apply rules where the queen isn't registered with them how come it's OK to take a female registered (say) with TICA?


I completely agree that the rule should be applied unilaterally to the stud owner in cases where the queen is unregistered, i.e. no allowance for stud owners to accept non-registered queens. Perhaps with dispensation of the rule on application, for something like use of the stud in, say, the formation of a new breed to an unregistered cat... but how often is that going to happen!

I'm not sure I'm understanding you correctly re, say, TICA active registered queens. My assumption is that this is fine because it was the intention of the breeder that the queen be bred from.


----------



## lisajjl1 (Jun 23, 2010)

OrientalSlave said:


> The way I look at it they are applying rules where the stud IS registered with them. After all you could take the view they can't apply rules where the queen isn't registered with them how come it's OK to take a female registered (say) with TICA?


Maybe they haven't addressed it as the kittens wont be registered at all so no benefit to them or any loss.

Pity they haven't though as obviously this is where peds without papers litters spring from - after all if you have a girl who you decide to not neuter/buy with no papers to breed from there is small to no chance of finding an entire boy of the same breed just wandering past your front door so outside studs must be used in many cases.


----------



## lymorelynn (Oct 4, 2008)

A charter for back yard breeders


----------



## OrientalSlave (Jan 26, 2012)

gskinner123 said:


> <snip>
> 
> I'm not sure I'm understanding you correctly re, say, TICA active registered queens. My assumption is that this is fine because it was the intention of the breeder that the queen be bred from.


Was thinking someone said a TICA-registered queen 'for breeding' could be accepted? To me that is applying GCCF jurisdiction over cats registered but not with GCCF, to me it should all be about the cats that are registered with them. It should be studs not to accept unregistered or not-for-breeding cats, queens not to go to unregistered or not-for-breeding studs.


----------



## Taylorbaby (Jan 10, 2009)

Thanks for the replies everyone, still cant get on the website!

Is it just me that finds this really sad?  Why would a registered breeder want to stud out to non papered girls?  I can only think of money? Other than that, whats the point? They might not even be ragdolls? So why mate your boy to them and promote more kittens to random cats?  

I just hated the line in the advert 'for a limited time only!'  Makes it sounds awful, the amount of un-reg studs was really shocking, people even asking for studs!! All said they don't care about papers etc but need one right away as their girls are in heat  A lot of thought went into that Im guessing!


----------



## gskinner123 (Mar 10, 2010)

OrientalSlave said:


> Was thinking someone said a TICA-registered queen 'for breeding' could be accepted? To me that is applying GCCF jurisdiction over cats registered but not with GCCF, to me it should all be about the cats that are registered with them. It should be studs not to accept unregistered or not-for-breeding cats, queens not to go to unregistered or not-for-breeding studs.


Ah, right, I'm with you (I think! I've not got my head on straight today). I do agree there should be no leeway for stud owners to accept unregistered queens. But I think it would be a bit tough for GCCF to rule that the owner of a GCCF reg'd stud could not accept queens that are active registered with another body. Being registered active, the intention for breeding was always there... and everybody's happy.


----------



## dagny0823 (Oct 20, 2009)

I'm not playing devil's advocate or anything, and obviously I know very little, but just wondering if the rationale (the "official" rationale, not the unofficial one that obviously you can make more if you charge each time you offer your cat for stud) is that unmated males get frustrated and have more behavioural issues if they don't get to mate, so this allows them to get some extra yah-yahs out, as it were. Also, don't some of them have problems getting the deed done, so this would give some practice as well? Again, not saying it's right or moral, just wondering if that's a motivation behind it. Discuss amongst yourselves


----------



## gskinner123 (Mar 10, 2010)

dagny0823 said:


> I'm not playing devil's advocate or anything, and obviously I know very little, but just wondering if the rationale (the "official" rationale, not the unofficial one that obviously you can make more if you charge each time you offer your cat for stud) is that unmated males get frustrated and have more behavioural issues if they don't get to mate, so this allows them to get some extra yah-yahs out, as it were. Also, don't some of them have problems getting the deed done, so this would give some practice as well? Again, not saying it's right or moral, just wondering if that's a motivation behind it. Discuss amongst yourselves


Extra yah-yah's  I think some stud owners (of the kind we are talking about) might put those reasons forward. I also think I wouldn't believe them. Any stud owner who cares about the well being of their 'boy' enough to be concerned about yah-yah practice and behavioral issues as a result of lack of... would also care enough not to take the highly risky route of taking in all-comers. Virtually none of them will be asking for the usual pre-mating health tests, checking queens' vaccination cards, scrutinizing queen's apparent health, etc, which, crucially, illustrates a lack of care other than for money in the first place.


----------



## dagny0823 (Oct 20, 2009)

gskinner123 said:


> Extra yah-yah's  I think some stud owners (of the kind we are talking about) might put those reasons forward. I also think I wouldn't believe them. Any stud owner who cares about the well being of their 'boy' enough to be concerned about yah-yah practice and behavioral issues as a result of lack of... would also care enough not to take the highly risky route of taking in all-comers. Virtually none of them will be asking for the usual pre-mating health tests, checking queens' vaccination cards, scrutinizing queen's apparent health, etc, which, crucially, illustrates a lack of care other than for money in the first place.


I was being, ahem, delicate 

Anyway, that's what I suspected, but I could definitely hear someone making a case that it's better for the boy this way, blah blah. And uninformed people would probably believe it. It's sort of like that thought that still has a solid foothold that a female, especially a dog, needs to have a litter to calm her down, make her a better pet, etc etc. I can't count the number of people I've met who still believe that.


----------



## Cosmills (Oct 3, 2012)

Let me get this right 

So my GCCF active registered stud can only go to GCCF reg active girls and not Tica/fife Active girls ??. He is closed anyway only for my own girls 

What if i permanently exported one of my girls to tica , what happens then 

But can be can cover unreg queens

If this is the case , someone need to get a grip ...


----------



## OrientalSlave (Jan 26, 2012)

This looks to be the wording:



> Section 1, Rule 3g. Prior to accepting a queen for mating, the owner of the stud shall establish that the queen is not registered on the Non-Active register. Note: Queens which are not registered with GCCF may be accepted for mating. A queen whose registration with another bona fide organisation is endorsed not for breeding should not be accepted.


In my view it should read: "_Only queens on the GCCF active register or registered for breeding with another bona fide organisation should be accepted_". Maybe the original intention was to exclude completely unregistered queens but that's not how it reads.

It might be best if those organisations were listed - there are some very shady registries in the US.

http://www.gccfcats.org/pdf/Rules.pdf


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> Maybe the original intention was to exclude completely unregistered queens but that's not how it reads


The original intention was to ensure non-active status of GCCF registered cats was respected/protected and nothing more.


----------



## gskinner123 (Mar 10, 2010)

Cosmills said:


> Let me get this right
> 
> So my GCCF active registered stud can only go to GCCF reg active girls and not Tica/fife Active girls ??.


No. According to GCCF rules, you CAN mate your TICA/FIFE active girls to your GCCF registered boy. It is only GCCF non-active registered queens/queens endorsed not for breeding through other bodies where you fall foul of the rules.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

The rules with studs only came in when the non-active register was created. It's perfectly acceptable to use a stud with a non ped if the owner wants, I agree most of us couldn't come up with a good reason to do so but it isn't against any rules nor was it ever intended to be. I can't imagine a single situation where a stud owner would risk taking in an obvious pedigree breed just because its owner said it wasn't registered. It isn't possible to prove the negative.


----------



## OrientalSlave (Jan 26, 2012)

Was there the same level of problem with BYBs in the past? Sort of wondering if they rewrote the rule now if it would be different as in more along the lines of 'no unregistered females' as well as 'no females not for breeding'.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> Was there the same level of problem with BYBs in the past?


Not in my opinion. The internet has been a BYB charter to print money. Without the ability to advertise so widely we relied on reputation and 'paid for' advertising in specialist magazines. I have seen a huge rise in people sharing information on club membership which has led to a huge rise the number of very questionable types who happen to have bought prefixes and then call themselves registered breeders. Certain breeds being 'money breeds' happened along just as disposable income and easy credit also became the norm so the world and his brother piled into breeding - because they could. It has all snowballed into one unholy mess but it isn't because of a lack of GCCF rules. The idea that buying a prefix automatically makes someone a good breeder doesn't wash with me and never will. Breeders should have high morals and high standards because they choose to, not because a registration body imposes them.


----------



## OrientalSlave (Jan 26, 2012)

I agree about a prefix. Some breeders leave me feeling I'd rather get a kitten from the better end of the BYBs.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> Sort of wondering if they rewrote the rule now if it would be different as in more along the lines of 'no unregistered females' as well as 'no females not for breeding'.


I'd hate to see that happen. I can't say I'd rush to take in the mog from down the road to my boy but many a breed has been the result of a happy accident. Where newer breeders are very focussed on their chosen breed it is important to remember that we don't so much breed a given breed as we breed 'selectively'. Many of us choose to make that selection within guidelines set down by advisory committees within already accepted breeds but there is no room for growth of any gene pool if we all get too hidebound in that. Eventually someone has to allow new genes in if we are going to keep the domesticated species genetically healthy. Is that person a bad person, a BYB? Do their reasons and ultimate aims make a difference to how we view them?


----------



## OrientalSlave (Jan 26, 2012)

With the way GCCF registration policies are drawn these days a random breeding with a moggie isn't going to increase the gene pool of pedigree cats. Some breeds allow (or did allow) DSH as an outcross, however for breeds such as the Burmese it looks like the only allowable outcross is an imported Burmese.

"The genetic diversity of the Burmese genepool within UK is limited and shrinking, and would benefit from the introduction of new and diverse genes via the importation of new blood-lines from abroad"

I have no idea if Thailand has a cat fancy with Burmese as one of the breeds...


----------



## MerlinsMum (Aug 2, 2009)

OrientalSlave said:


> I have no idea if Thailand has a cat fancy with Burmese as one of the breeds...


It does, but they would probably be American or European Burmese, not the Thong Daeng which, if recognised (likely is) would be classed as a separate breed anyway.

The only native Thai breed which can source cats from its country of origin and use them in breeding projects is the Korat.


----------



## MerlinsMum (Aug 2, 2009)

OrientalSlave said:


> Was there the same level of problem with BYBs in the past?


No. 
25 years ago you looked in your local Loot or Trade-It if you wanted to buy a cat (and didn't know where else to look), or Cat World. Similarly, there was nowhere else to advertise litters, so I used to advertise mine in Loot (I was in London at the time).


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

Sadly I'm old enough to recall (with some fondness) the days when pedigree animals were advertised in a publication called Fur and Feathers  That and the local paper were the only options in print. A club official would hold a breed kitten list for their area which is where most buyers found their breeder.



> *With the way GCCF registration policies are drawn these days* a random breeding with a moggie isn't going to increase the gene pool


Says everything - and I wasn't exactly thinking of it being totally random. The skill of the breeder is after all in selection


----------



## lymorelynn (Oct 4, 2008)

havoc said:


> Sadly I'm old enough to recall (with some fondness) the days when pedigree animals were advertised in a publication called Fur and Feathers  That and the local paper were the only options in print. A club official would hold a breed kitten list for their area which is where most buyers found their breeder.
> 
> Says everything - and I wasn't exactly thinking of it being totally random. The skill of the breeder is after all in selection


I bought my first Siamese through an ad in Fur and Feather


----------



## MerlinsMum (Aug 2, 2009)

havoc said:


> Sadly I'm old enough to recall (with some fondness) the days when pedigree animals were advertised in a publication called Fur and Feathers


 Me too - it was for the rabbit shows, but there were always cats on the front! I used to read it from cover to cover. I also had a pile of old F&Fs from the mid-60's, found when I was volunteering with newspaper collection at school.

By the time I was able to have my first cat, it had become CATS, and was difficult to get hold of, so not much use for ads.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

I think a fair few breeders also used Exchange & Mart which had a large animal section. It all cost money and had to be thought about in advance - very different to being able to post a free internet ad in minutes.


----------



## OrientalSlave (Jan 26, 2012)

They might have also used notices in shops and in the Pet section in the local newspapers. I still see kitten & puppy ads if I get a local paper, which is almost as rare as hen's teeth.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

There weren't the sort of shops back then, places like Pets at Home exist now and have notice boards but it tended to be moggy kittens advertised in local newsagents etc. Most of my buyers were introduced through the breed club kitten list holder. There was one for each area and everything was by telephone. The list holder was a selfless person, it took a lot of their time.


----------

