It may come as a surprise to many, but even though I was the first Accredited Chihuahua Breeder in New Zealand (I joined in 2015), and strongly support any efforts to improve the health and welfare of our dogs, not only did I resign some time ago from the Accredited Breeder Scheme, but actively supported its abolition.
When I resigned from the Accredited Breeder Scheme a couple of years ago, I was asked to explain why in writing. This blog contains much of what I wrote to Dogs NZ about my reasons for resigning. I firmly believe replacing the ABS with Litter Registration Limitations (LRLs) will do much more for our breed’s health and welfare than a fancy logo and the snobbery that a notable few attached to it. The ABS was embraced by some very inexperienced breeders to give themselves some “street-cred” while ignoring experienced breeders who found it absurd to be ranked on the same level as someone who (in many cases), had not even bred a litter.
Having said that, I do wish to acknowledge that the vast majority of the breeders who joined the scheme were ethical and trying to do the best for their breed. I can only speak to what I know, so please, do not take this as a criticism of all breeders in the scheme, just understand that my opinions have been formed based on the actions of some breeders I observed, as a member of the scheme.
The ABS was too easy to join and required no breeding knowledge. At all.
It was possible to pass the “knowledge test” needed to do to join the ABS, simply by doing the test online test 6 times. Because the questions were not randomised, all one needed to do was answer A to all questions in the first attempt. It would report which questions you got right. Attempt it again. Answer the A questions correctly and answer B for everything else. Next time, the report tells you all the correct B answers. Rinse and repeat until you had all the answers then sit the test a final time to get a perfect score without even reading the questions. There was no limit on how many times someone could attempt the test, so even the most clueless eventually managed to pass.
If that wasn’t bad enough, once having achieved “Accredited Breeder” status, all you had to do to become a “special status breeder’ of any breed that took your fancy, was just add the breed to the list of your breeds on your Dogs NZ profile page and Hey Presto! You now are an “accredited breeder” for a breed you don’t own, have never owned or know anything about.
Off the top of my head, I could name at least three breeders who were “accredited” without ever having bred a litter or even owned a dog in the breed of which they claimed to be a "special status breeder".
Some breeders joined the ABS simply to jack up their prices
Then we have the problem of the “special status” tag being used for financial gain with no care at all for the breed.
The most blatant example of this was one I was involved in as the President of the Dominion Chihuahua Club when a single mum, otherwise unconnected with dog breeding, started “Fluffybunny Kennels”(yes, that was the name) and was immediately given accredited breeder status despite having no connection to the dog world, at all.
This so alarmed the committee of the Dominion Chihuahua Club at the time, we sent the email following to Dogs NZ (this is an abridged version and names have been removed. It is reprinted here with the permission of the DCC committee):
We noticed XXXXXX is now listed as an Accredited Chihuahua Breeder.
This person is known to our club, and we believe this accreditation should not be allowed for the following reasons:
She has never actually produced a litter from any dog at all.
She is not a financial member of any affiliated club that we are aware of. She came to our club for an event once about 2 years ago, looking information on how to become a Dogs NZ breeder because she had been told by another breeder that she could make money selling puppies on TradeMe and she could sell them for more if she was Dogs NZ registered.
We have not seen her since she attended one show as a spectator and one training night at CKA. She is definitely not a financial member of our club.
She has also attempted to acquire entire rescue dogs with the intention of breeding them and in fact, did take on several rescue dogs a couple of years ago when a deceased hoarder's 11 Chihuahuas were handed out very carelessly by a local vet clinic where they had been surrendered.
She was very quick to grab the entire females but then had to ask the our club to take the dogs off her hands a couple of weeks later when she claimed they attacked one of her pet dogs, after breaking out of their pen. We felt at the time that while this was probably true, the realisation that dogs had to be papered in order to charge for "NZKC registered" puppies may have played a hand in her decision to be rid of them, based on our previous interactions with her and her stated breeding intentions.
We do not wish to in any way to malign this person and do not mean this as a slight on her character or her best intentions to breed healthy dogs, but as a club, we are very concerned to see this listing and urge you to review it. She is well-meaning but she is also an overwhelmed young widow with two special needs children under 12, who has been told she can make extra cash breeding dogs. She doesn't even understand that she can't breed the dogs she has and register them, even as a regular litter, let alone an accredited one.
We tried to help her when she came to us a couple of years ago, but we have not had any contact with her since she told us of her plans to breed pups to supplement her income, and our experienced breeders tried to convince her she needed to learn about the breed first and get some experience, perhaps find a mentor, before becoming a breeder. She did not like this advice, I suppose, and that was the last we saw of her.
Please reconsider this decision as her inclusion as an "accredited" breeder does not reflect well on the scheme at all, and we believe it also does not meet the Dogs NZ requirements. At the very least, could you please contact the club of which she is now a member and urge them to help her, because more than anything, she needs guidance and support from breeders who have actually whelped a litter.
Dogs NZ did nothing to vet accredited breeder applicants. In fact, were it not for the vigilance of the DCC, this breeder may not have been picked up at all.
Although this happened in 2019, no changes were made to the scheme entry requirements that allowed this breeder to join.
The “Fluffybunny” case also highlights the fact that some breeders joined the scheme simply because they believed they could charge more for their puppies with the ABS logo attached.
This is a complaint I heard from a number of serious accredited breeders while I was a member of the ABS, where it was perceived even among its members, that there were two classes of “accredited breeder” – those who joined for their betterment of their breed, and those who joined for the betterment of their bank accounts.
The Scheme was open to abuse and was abused by unethical breeders
I have knowledge of a breeder (not a client of mine) who purchased a stud dog which arrived with Grade 4 luxating patellas.
Not wishing to submit health tests with this stain on the dog’s soundness, the Breeder had the patellas surgically repaired, in the hope that post-surgery, the dog would pass the patella examination with flying colours.
Unfortunately, the surgery was not successful and the dog was still classified as having Grade 2 luxating patellas, post-op. Rather than have this show up in the health tests, the breeder resigned from the Accredited Breeder Scheme, bred a litter with the dog, registered the progeny and then rejoined the scheme once the pups were registered (without having to submit any health tests) so they could proudly claim that they were an “ethical” Accredited Breeder.
Any scheme that allows that to happen is, in my opinion, seriously flawed. The ABS did nothing to encourage the breeding of sound dogs, because nobody was checking anything. This breeder was more than happy to simply sidestep the ABS and all its ethics completely, breed a litter from a dog that was genetically likely to pass on luxating patellas, and rejoin the scheme when the deed was done, so they could continue to boast of their high ethical standards.
If LRLs had been in place, it would not have been possible to side step the health testing requirements and hide this dog's major health issues, and the breeder would have been forced to make a more ethical decision on whether or not to breed this dog.
The ABS did not differentiate between experienced and novice breeders
Because the scheme made no attempt to differentiate between experienced and novice breeders, lumping everyone with the same moniker of “accredited”, breeders who should have been seeking help and mentoring were holding themselves out as better breeders than some who have been breeding for decades.
I believe this failure to offer different levels of accreditation had much to do with the pushback and resistance from more experienced breeders who not only refused to join the scheme but actively denigrated it.
These more experienced breeders believed, and not unfairly, that no scheme had any value at all when it allowed a “Fluffybunny Kennels”, or a breeder to become “accredited” without ever owning a dog of the breed in question, or ignored breeders jumping in and out of the scheme as it suited them.
To promote breeders like this as having “special breeder status” and placing them above other, ethical breeders with vast experience and a proven legacy, alienated the very breeders who should have been at the pinnacle of this program and mentoring new breeders, to the benefit of all.
The ABS did not follow up on its own stated aims or check if they were being fulfilled.
The DNZ website listed accredited breeders as having “special breeder status, strict health checks, reliable support to buyers”.
This is not just misleading, but, in my opinion, patently untrue.
Not so long ago, I was called on to support a new owner who purchased a puppy with behavioural problems from an accredited breeder. The problems were serious and ongoing, but when they approached the breeder for assistance were informed that “well, the pup was fine when it was here”.
With my advice and assistance we were able to socialise this puppy, who had clearly not been socialised at all, and improve the situation significantly. In my opinion, this is not “reliable support to buyers”. What's more. the pet owner was completely unaware that they could have contacted Dogs NZ about the breeder’s lack of support, and were on the verge of surrendering the dog to the SPCA.
Nothing came of it, however, because even though I could have reported the breeder, it is not my job to police other breeders, and I certainly don’t think I should have to pay $150 to complain about something Dogs NZ should have been policing themselves.
There was no requirement for continuing education
Despite having “special breeder status” once a breeder passed the test there was no other requirement for the breeder to improve their knowledge.
If accredited breeders were awarded “special breeder status” surely there should have been some requirement to prove they were staying at the forefront of knowledge on breeding practices and health conditions within their breed.
I finally decided to resign from the scheme in 2022 when I realised none of these issues could be fixed, nor was Dogs NZ interested in putting any resources into the scheme to improve matters or weed out the breeders giving the scheme a bad name.
I believed in the aspirations of the ABS and was the first NZ Chihuahua breeder to join. I actively encouraged other breeders to join,. But I came to realise, over time, that in its current form, it was a rubber stamp awarding “special breeder status” to some worthy breeders and some who definitely were not.
For this reason, I fully supported the abolition of the ABS and put in a lengthy submission explaining my reasons why.
But I didn’t support the abolition of the scheme because I wanted to end health testing. I believe we need effective and lasting change. For that reason, I proposed the LRLs for Chihuahuas.
I truly believe making everyone health test their breeding dogs is far better for the long term health of all breeds than a few people using the moniker “accredited breeder” to make themselves look better than far more experienced, and, dare I say, just as (if not more) ethical breeders who were never a part of the scheme.
The results of the LRL vote have yet to come out, but I am hopeful that my suggestions will be accepted by the Chihuahua Breeders of NZ and soon we will all be applying the minimum health tests required to make sure our breed’s health improves in future and the artificial elevation of unqualified breeders using the ABS as a sales-tool fades into a sad and distant memory.
Again, the above is based on my opinion and things I witnessed firsthand. I know there are some very disappointed and excellent breeders out there who feel the scheme should have been continued, but in my opinion, the best thing is for everyone to be health testing, and I urge them to keep working towards developing LRLs for their breeds, so that all pedigree dogs can be held up to the same high standards the ABS was supposed to uphold.
Kommentare