Breeding Akiho to non-Akiho

edited January 2013 in Akita (秋田犬)
I read a post of Sean's that got me thinking. Here is the part that seemed interesting to me:
We are all problem solvers, so when we see simple solution it makes sense to just go for it. The problem is that sometimes there are un-intended results attached to these choices.

I just don't understand why people preach one thing or join a certain group and the choose to ignore all the rules/tradition/values that these groups value?

Perfect example, LA-Branch would get hammered as an elitest club that wouldn't share their dogs. It was pointed out to the breeder that in order to get an akiho registration number you would need to breed Akiho X Akiho. The person was shopping for a new puppy and it would have been simple to get a pup from Japan with an export pedigree. In turn that would have opened them up to using our club dogs.

They chose to get a dog without an akiho number but was upset that we would not let them stud with us. We were the bad guys for following our rules, whereas that person never once considered honor our rules/values.

I know that is kinda off topic but it kinda seems to go with it as well.
You all know i am European and we abide by FCI rules. Once an Akiho dog is imported to FCI countries, that dog receives FCI registration and he/she can be bred to other FCI registered JAs, whether they have Akiho numbers or not.

I think it is useful for the breed and it expands the gene pool, new blood coming into Europe one the one hand and the tightly line bred Japanese dogs receiving the same treatment on the other.

Why is it that in the US you are not allowed to breed Akiho to non-Akiho now that you have UKC that recognizes the breed???
«1

Comments

  • I still prefer Akiho pedigree before UKC for now.

    But it won't be problem to breed JA if both dogs have UKC pedigree.

    It just started from this year.
  • edited January 2013
    Of course, for registration purposes it was normal to go with Akiho when there is no other choice. But for the good of the breed in the US on the long run it is good to expand your horizon to include non Akiho as well.
    That pup that Sean was talking about - I bet he was probably coming from FCI ccountries, with FCI papers. Those dogs are no less JA than the Akiho registered ones.
    I will give you an example: my boy Kito is out of Akiho x FCI. The FCI is out of Akiho x US Akiho and the US Akiho is out of Akihos born in Japan. But if my boy was living in the US he would have UKC numbers and theoretically would not be allowed to breed to Akiho if I understand Sean correctly.
  • To some this is going to be like splitting hairs but I need to make some important clarifications to the information posted.
    You all know i am European and we abide by FCI rules. Once an Akiho dog is imported to FCI countries, that dog receives FCI registration and he/she can be bred to other FCI registered JAs, whether they have Akiho numbers or not
    An exported dog from Japan gets a JKC Export Pedigree, which is part of FCI. The dog already has an Akiho number on it. It is the JKC Export Pedigree not the Akiho Pedigree that allows the pup to be registered withan FCI country.
    Why is it that in the US you are not allowed to breed Akiho to non-Akiho now that you have UKC that recognizes the breed???
    As a member of Akiho, you need to breed Akiho X Akiho. If I am an Akiho member why would I want to produce pups that cannot be registered to the breed club that I belong to? Just like in Japan the vast majority of the dogs are registered Akiho and then JKC.
  • edited January 2013
    Of course, for registration purposes it was normal to go with Akiho when there is no other choice. But for the good of the breed in the US on the long run it is good to expand your horizon to include non Akiho as well.
    That pup that Sean was talking about - I bet he was probably coming from FCI ccountries, with FCI papers. Those dogs are no less JA than the Akiho registered ones.
    I will give you an example: my boy Kito is out of Akiho x FCI. The FCI is out of Akiho x US Akiho and the US Akiho is out of Akihos born in Japan. But if my boy was living in the US he would have UKC numbers and theoretically would not be allowed to breed to Akiho if I understand Sean correctly.
    If your FCI boy is who I think it is from, they could have kept that AKIHO number current and your boy could be registered with them today.

    Europe has had two branches spring up in less than five years. If I understand this correctly, one other European country is asking their kennel club to directly register Akiho dogs. People like the idea of breed specific clubs.

    Also when a branch is founded, open breeding is frowned upon but allowed for a certain number of years. For example Akiho-LA was an open club for it's first ten years. The 1980 show marked the first show for only Akiho dogs. At a certain point HQ will expect their Akiho kennels to only be using Akiho dogs.





  • edited January 2013
    What you said is completely true, but the difference is that in Japan there are tens of thousands of Akitas to choose from, in FCI countries put together there are thousands and in the US there are only hundreds or even dozens of breedable JAs. Invariably the gene pool will narrow more and more and problems will appear more often than not. We already face debates in northern Europe about cross breeding, I can only imagine the debates if we had even fewer dogs.

    Just my 2 cents, I might be wrong, I am just trying to understand the reasoning behind these rules with the good of the breed in the long turn in mind.

    As for my Kito, there are 2 things: 1) to me the Akiho number does not make him more of a JA than he already is; and 2) the procedures are more complicated that you might imagine, he cannot get the Akiho number if his European born mother does not get it first. Plus, I recall that there has to be another Akiho member to declare he/she has witnessed the matings.

    Maybe I will do it in the end, who knows what the future will bring. Until now all the "benefits" that I have seen from having Akiho registered pups being born in Europe is a shocking rise in the price of these pups, while their quality would have been the same with or without Akiho papers.

    The biggest difference is that we have the big FCI umbrella to show under, so even if in the future Akiho will require only Akiho dogs to be shown, the rest of the JA population will still have FCI.
  • edited January 2013
    "The AKIHO number does not make him more of a JA than he already is."

    Registration with a particular organization does not change the quality of a dog, I agree. The registration/pedigree is not a measure of a dog's quality, but instead grants access to competitions to prove his quality. You could have a fantastic purebred dog but without the right paperwork you can't prove anything. I've seen many dogs that look like they could be champions that people adopted from a rescue or shelter...

    Without an AKIHO number, a Japanese Akita cannot compete in AKIHO shows and cannot earn titles and awards from AKIHO. To me the true measure of quality in a dog is not determined by a national kennel club but by the breed club of the country of origin -- the same people who set the breed standard. A national kennel club judge, even at a specialty show, will never know the measure of Japanese Akita as thoroughly and deeply as an AKIHO judge.

    UKC is a great opportunity for the US breeders and I am excited to be a part of it. All of my dogs will have both AKIHO and UKC registrations. But I am under no illusions that a UKC judge will ever really know the finer points of a Japanese Akita, such that s/he could pick out the better of two littermates. That said, being able to compete against other breeds, instead of only showing in what is essentially a specialty show, is very cool. Having access to performance events and of course just many more shows a year is also great.

    I have never understood why Europeans brag endlessly about their Meiyosho winning imports from Japan and then fail to register their puppies with AKIHO. They recognize the huge accomplishment that Meiyosho represents (IMO the greatest honor a JA can ever earn in his lifetime), yet prevent the dog's offspring and the product of their kennels from ever competing for that same achievement. It makes absolutely zero sense.

    Is it inconvenient that we're only allowed to breed to other AKIHO dogs? Yes. However, not for the reason you may think. There are not any non-AKIHO dogs in the US worth breeding to so that isn't really a stumbling block. The problem is that we cannot import from Europe because most of the European breeders simply don't bother maintaining AKIHO registration for their pups. But even that is very minor, since the same quality and greater genetic diversity can be had from Japan, so why bother with Europe?

    Europeans are the ones missing out here. They're missing out on the opportunity to prove that the dogs born in their kennels are just as good as the ones in Japan by competing in the AKIHO show ring. They're missing out on being able to export their dogs to the US and grow their kennel name in the Americas, where the vast majority of purebred Japanese Akita breeders are AKIHO members. They're missing out on being able to use studs from the US in their breeding programs to bring in new lines, because they refuse to register AKIHO and we're forbidden from breeding with non-AKIHO dogs including stud services.
  • edited January 2013
    I'll chime in from a non-breeder perspective. As a pet owner, I want an AKIHO dog. For someone who just wants a pet, I understand that it's not as important, but for all the same reasons that @poeticdragon has mentioned, AKIHO represents a consistency in quality and standards that I am relying on for choosing a pet.

    In Europe, there are so many different shows and awards and this is hard for people from overseas countries to follow. While a dog may be an Italian champion, it doesn't (to me) hold the same weight as a Meiyosho. ( AKIHO judging standards strive to be consistent worldwide whereas generalist judges in different countries are not ) So like Claire pointed out, why doesn't Europe insist upon keeping the AKIHO framework? It is evident that they value AKIHO awards since they pay big bucks to bring over the most fabulous award winners from Japan then breed them with enthusiasm.

    It would be awesome to see this expertise in judging become more widespread. I think in essence, this is what AKIHO is trying to do. I'm not lumping all European breeders into this category, because there are a handful which do follow AKIHO stipulations for breeding, but not all.

    I live in Toronto, Canada and it doesn't make the least bit of sense for me to transfer AKIHO registration but I am planning on doing it. First, I live too far for any US AKIHO breeders to access me, but if I do import a quality pup ( or if someone else here decides to do the same as me) I don't want to lose that option. I really want to see the breed become more popular up here in Canada and this is why I am importing from an AKIHO kennel and keeping him registered. :)
  • edited January 2013
    Thank you for your thoughts, I can totally see your point of view and Claire - I think you are right about some European breeders that can get Akiho numbers but don't. They are simply doing it because of the politics behind the Akiho club but it does not do the breed any service.

    I still stand by my original thought and it's a bit my fault that the discussion deviated so much (or it is the language barrier that stops be from properly conveying my thoughts) - if a certain percentage of the JA population in the US cannot breed to another percentage of the JA population then Akiho will breed to Akiho and non-Akiho to non-Akiho and in 10 years time there is a high danger of having too much close linebreeding and even inbreeding.

    The US have not yet faced the autoimmune problems Europe has seen due to too close inbreeding and I would hate to see it happening to you too because there are not enough dogs to mate with.

    Of course, things could change if there were massive imports of Akihos in the US but for a country as big as the US the numbers are really low. I was looking at the Nihon Ken member map and the Akita dots are so few. :-(
  • edited January 2013
    I can see that being a problem. However, I think we have an "advantage" that Europe does not. Our population is so small that we must have new imports every generation in order to continue breeding and just a couple dogs can dramatically influence the breed here. There is a great risk if we import even one dog with major health problems that is overused as a stud, but at the same time, its also easy for us to clear the board and start over with a few awesome imports. To my knowledge, there is only one active breeder here who has established their own line and can claim their dogs come from JA born in the US for more than 2-3 generations.
  • As long as you have full disclosure from the Japanese breeder about the genetic baggage your import brings with him/her, your strategy has no flaws, you are right.

    Perhaps you have better ties to Japan than most european breeders. We don't have that unfortunately. Over here we saw too many imports being carriers for AI when it was too late. They had already been used extensively and by the time people realised it there were even more carriers and affected dogs.

    We have a saying, I will translate it as it is as I don't know the equivalent in english: Once you burn your tongue with soup you will blow on your yoghurt to make sure it's not too hot.

    For these reason many people, included me, are rather weary of using Japanese imports as soon as they arrive for mating. And it is understandable as we don't know what they carry as I know for sure that practices in Europe are awful when it comes to disclosure regarding disease. I know of breeders that used their dogs knowing they are carriers, sold dogs that are carriers knowing that they are carriers and not sharing that with the new owner and many more. Once that dog has proven himself and the chances of being a carrier are smaller I will consider him as stud for one of my girls (that comes from lines I know and I am more confident about her genetic baggage).

    I know for sure that the Japanese have sent dogs to Europe knowing they are carriers, so when there is so little information and the stakes are so high you tend to go with the lines that you know to be healthy. For me the smallest risk of breeding sick puppies is combining European lines with Japanese lines that I know that they are clean (as much as possible at least). It is not a bulletproof strategy but it is the best I have come up with after analyzing the JA scene over here.

    This is a situation that appears with all breeds, not just the JA. It's the same or even worse with breeds that are less represented, even in Japan. People should talk about it more to my mind. If there is more disclosure the breed will stand a better chance on the long run.
  • Re-reading my posts I see they may be seen a bit confrontational even though it is not my intention. As you, I love this breed so much and I put a lot of passion into it, I am very happy with the progress made by the US in the past years but now is the moment to push and go to the next level and one of the most important tools is exchange of info and practices.

    You have the opportunity to learn from mistakes made by others (like us, Europeans) and you should grab it, to breed according to what you know to be best and not according to some rules that may not beneficial to the breed on the long run. For example I would not hesitate to breed a long coat if he/she has unique genes and is a healthy typical representative of the breed although there are rules that forbid it. But that is just me and my 2 cents :)
  • @white_bear - Have the Japanese imports been outcrosses to those already in Europe, or have people been importing winning dogs even if related to those already in Europe?
  • edited January 2013
    @white_bear I didn't take anything as confrontational. :)

    You have a lot of very good points. I feel that communication among our JACA/AKIHO breeders is very high, and even those that don't talk to each other directly, probably have a pretty good idea what is going on in each others' kennels. Its hard not to be aware of this stuff when you can count the litters per year in the US on one hand so every puppy or new dog you don't recognize you want to know where it came from. Well -- at least I do. Maybe I'm just weird like that.

    [I was thinking about it the other night and I realized if you took all of the mature, intact dogs own by AKIHO breeders in the US, I think you would still have less than the breedable dogs owned by just one major European JA kennel such as Shun'you Kensha.]

    Likewise with such a tiny group, the moment you hear about a purebred Japanese Akita having a congenital disease... people are going to ask and find out which breeder and which litter it came from. Sure, we don't know about every pet in every home placed by every breeder, especially the two or three breeders who really have no online presence at all. But when those pet owners have a health problem and they start posting it on this forum, or on Facebook, or asking JACA for help, we'll put two and two together.

    There aren't a lot of dirty little secrets to be had in our group, or if there are, they're extremely well hidden. The worst I could say about the dogs currently being bred today is that I know a line which tends to have skin problems and food allergies. Of course some issues may not become apparent until a dog is older after its already been bred a number of times, but those are very difficult to screen for regardless whether its an import or domestic dog.

    Besides, the blame cannot be placed entirely on the imports or Japanese breeders. Yes, the imports may be carriers of some undesirable traits or health issues. However, they're only half of the equation. The dog the import is bred to must also be a carrier and that breeding choice was not made by the Japanese but by the European breeders.

    @ayk From what I've seen in the big European kennels (watching them on Facebook and looking at pedigrees on akitapedigree.com) they're not importing outcrosses...
  • edited January 2013
    :-) Glad to know. I love it over here and I hope I will have the chance to meet many of you in the future in person (and not get the evil eye lol) !

    From what I know you have an awesome group over there and honestly with your way of thinking and doing things I am more inclined to become an LA Akiho member rather than join the two that are currently in Europe.

    Real AI problems we consider to be SA or VKH, not mere food allergies - though these are not to be desired either.

    Genetics is weird and tricky and we still have no idea how it works, that is why all breeders screw up or will surely screw up at some point. It matters what you do after you screw up. I am 100% sure that there is no clear bloodline. There are carriers in all lines, you just have to be damn good to find them and eliminate them from breeding once you have spotted them. I am 100% sure that some unfortunate day I will breed a sick baby despite my desperate attempts to avoid it doing my research thoroughly before bringing puppies into this world. Whoever says that his lines are clear or that he will not breed a sick puppy is kidding himself and is a huge danger for the breed. I know most (I hope) carriers in my lines and do my best to make the right choices. That is why people that don't do their homework and don't research their lines thoroughly cause my hackles to rise. But that is another story.

    There are 2 types of breeders: breeders who do the research and they are less prone to accidents and breeders that don't do it and they have many accidents (by accidents meaning sick puppies). Yes, fault is shared and probably the one that owns the female bears most of the responsibility. But sometimes accidents happen even with the best of breeders. As I said, genetics is tricky. In one litter you can have carriers as well as non carriers. They look the same, move the same, act the same. Personal example: a full brother of one of my dog's sire is a known carrier, he has produced sick puppies. Not sure if full brother is a correct term - my dog's sire was born in a very nice litter and the breeder decided to repeat it and the carrier was born in the repeat litter. They are both born in Japan and they have been both exported to Europe (the carrier much later). The value of my dog's sire is huge, he is all one can hope an Akita to be. It was a difficult decision to make, whether to get a puppy sired by him or not, as his brother was a carrier. The thing that reassured me was the fact that my dog's sire had previously sired more than a hundred puppies with a dozen females or so that came from different lines without any sick puppies showing up. As his offspring are +5 years I am more and more confident that there are no problems coming from his side.

    @ayk for a long time most breeders didn't bring outcrosses. For several reasons: differences in Japanese/Western culture, language barrier, reluctance of breeders to send out their best dogs (though that is another culture thing i guess). Another reason is that certain lines won big in Europe. An example: with Akita Cup, the first and biggest all akita show in Europe, if you had a Shirai dog you surely won something. People started importing many Shirai dogs in order to win. That is also the main reason why some breeders decided to move away from Akita Cup and started Hozonkai Europa, the Western European Akiho branch.

    There were also more open minded kennels sending dogs abroad - Musashi Aiwa, Miyagi Kozaki Kensha, Okayama Nishioota, Aso Inoue now there is Shikoku Mori and a few others.

    For a while there was and still is, though less it seems, a bad practice of importing a good dog - breed him/her extensively and then import one of his parents or both, and over breed them as well, which meant that the gene pool get narrower but that the show results were nicer.

    There are some breeders that are constantly trying to bring in new lines, but that is difficult and most of the time the quality is not as good as that of the other dogs and unavoidably they are ignored. But things are getting better and there are some nice dogs coming in, so the future is bright. :)

    Later edit: it's not the big kennels you should be watching, but what happens under the radar in smaller kennels that have the best interest of the breed at heart first and money second.
  • Four years ago, I had never owned a dog EVER. When I started looking for Akitas, I promised myself that I would avoid the show scene like the plaque. Four months later, I was watch an Akiho Show.

    For me this is what the branch does right: The focus of the show is on the breed and how it is doing within the branch. It is also equally about you are you preserving the breed by participating in the show.

    Right below that comes the part of seeing people. Some people you see at the smaller events and others it is 1 year at the show.

    Our breeding programs are far from perfect. We have had our share of puppies with illness. For the most part people remove the dogs from breeding when a problem arrises. Our members have been very good about supporting the puppies after they are placed. Like Claire said above, most of us suffer through food issues.

    Even though its through JACA, the database (thanks to Claire) has COI data built into it. When I breed I send one out usually calculated to 4 generations. When a breeder is looking to do a line-breeding, as a board member, I just try to make sure they know exactly what is in the background.

    It is simple to look at the branch and say that Akiho X Akiho policy is why the branch is so small. In a sense that is correct as AKC will not accept Akiho pedigree directly. But the benefit is that we have sheltered our breed from being puppy milled. The people that are coming in to the club buy into the preservation aspect and not show to win.

    Akiho X Akiho does another thing. It removes the fear of breeding to a blend. That is something that you do not need to worry about over there anymore. Every now and then, you'll see a pedigree over here for a 2010-12 dog that still has pre-1998 dogs in the pedigree.

    Look at Tim Kim, perfect example, he went out and got Akiho numbers for his girl. Here is someone who has never been in the branch at all. Wants to breed and could have very easily just imported from Korea and done whatever he wanted. Instead he joins the branch, gets his Akiho numbers and is doing health checks to boot.

  • edited January 2013
    On the topic of the JACA database and COI I discovered a bug with the calculations yesterday and am working on fixing it. Some dogs had inflated coefficients because it was not correctly checking that a shared ancestor was in both the top and bottom half of the pedigree. It mostly affects dogs who have linebred parents that are not themselves related to each other.

    EDIT: It's fixed now. :)
  • AKIHO, LA branch actually has a great advantage over other branches. Being the oldest branch outside of Japan, it's the members who have been a part of LA branch from the day one. It's been established since 1970 and we still have members from that time.

    These members have great knowledge on who's who in AKIHO in Japan and have eyes on what is a good akita. They have been following the rules of AKIHO, and we continue the same tradition of breeding AKIHO x AKIHO. We understand that it doesn't always benefit us and we do have shortage on breeding lines sometimes. But once you are a member of a club, you are to follow the rules. If you want to breed AKIHO x non-AKIHO, then you no longer need to be a part of AKIHO dog club.

    For me, I value AKIHO club too much to do anything that is against it's by-laws. And as a VP of LA branch, I need to prevent from members to do that.

    And I agree with Sean that this prevents from puppy mills. It is still very hard to get JA in US. As much as I would love this breed to be more known in US, I kinda like it being a bit mysterious and not overly populated. It's a privilege to have JA. ;)
  • edited January 2013
    I see what you mean and they are valid arguments and I can completely understand the reasoning behind them.

    COI is a great tool and I am looking forward to have it in place for the akitapedigree.com database as well, but it is not necessarily the type of research I am talking about. It is very useful, but not enough I think. I am talking about speaking to other breeders and researching pedigrees of sick puppies and trying to identify the carrier, it's not that bad if the COI is higher for a dog that you know to be healthy but it is very bad to double on one who is or might be a carrier.

    Going back to my original thought, I think - and this is just an outsider's opinion - that Akiho members should have the right to decide for themselves if they want to breed exclusively to Akiho or not. As Sean put it earlier, you cannot export a dog with Akiho numbers without getting JKC numbers first. That means that Akiho does not act as a club, but as a preservation society and as such the registration is not recognised by other kennel clubs. I agree that you should always look at what Akiho HQ is doing and maintain the general lines but you should also take into account the particularities of your country/region.

    Perhaps my position is skewed by the fact that we first had FCI and then Akiho and you had Akiho first and then UKC, I don't know. Perhaps it is just the practical need to have where to choose from when buying a puppy or doing a mating.

    I am always looking at the practical aspects as well the theoretical ones. For example I am looking to find a male to breed with Tsuki when the time comes - this summer I think. Luckily there are tens if not hundred of males to choose from but I want to find the perfect one to complement her minuses (no dog is perfect). I first look at available studs on a 1000 miles radius from where I live (it's her first litter and I don't want to go too far), then I look at the pedigrees and see what will work with Tsuki's pedigree from the health point of view, then at the body structure of the dog and then at the colour (I would like a red male for her). This selection has brought down the number of potential mates to just 3 or 4 out of tens maybe hundreds. I am lucky enough to have the possibility to choose and I can get real picky (for example not choosing a stud that sired two world champions from nice healthy lines because he seems to have the tendency to throw his front paws inwards, something that Tsuki is also prone to) and to me that is progress and trying to breed better dogs and something that a preservation society like Akiho should focus on first and foremost. If you don't have dogs to choose from you will most likely double on something that displeases you - for me, for example, that would be a chest that is not low enough - something that you see more and more in Japan nowadays.

    @dogmom8, I think it is a privilege to have any of the nihon ken, these dogs are just so special :-)
  • This is funny, there's been a row recently within my Kai buddies about KKA x NIPPO breeding. Opinions all over the fence, and some were pretty random.
  • @TheWalrus you mean here or in the Kai community?
  • edited January 2013
    "You cannot export a dog with AKIHO numbers without getting JKC numbers first."

    Technically, you can't import to an FCI kennel club without the JKC numbers. The dog can be exported without a JKC pedigree just fine. I only got JKC for my first two Japanese Akitas. I didn't bother for the others, since I don't need it for anything. My dogs are staying within AKIHO and their puppies are registered with AKIHO directly. UKC accepts an AKIHO pedigree for import, eliminating the in-between steps to get JKC.

    Do FCI countries accept UKC pedigrees for import? That would be interesting.
  • @poeticdragon Some countries do but then you have to have AKC's FSS.
  • Wait, what? You need something from AKC has absolutely zero to do with UKC?
  • edited January 2013
    @poeticdragon yes, I was thinking about importing to FCI countries :)

    And no, I don't think FCI has a letter of understanding with UKC, only with AKC. I will check and get back to you.

    later edit: I checked FCI's webpage, it has letters of understanding only with AKC, KC (UK) and CKC (Canada), no UKC.
  • @white_bear Maybe that would be an interesting project to start on. Lobbying the FCI to accept UKC pedigrees. ;)
  • @poeticdragon I have UKC dog in FCI pedigree. So it really is possible in some countries!
  • edited January 2013
    I hope i'm not hijacking this thread by asking this question - but when I bring my puppy over to Canada from Japan, do I have to register him with the CKC ? ( Canadian Kennel Club?)

    The CKC doesn't even recognize the JA (let alone the split). I don't know how this works; and the CKC hasn't gotten back to me yet. I am in the process of getting an AKIHO membership, is this enough? thx!

    http://www.ckc.ca/en/Portals/0/pdf/breeds/AIA.pdf
  • edited January 2013
    You only have to register with the CKC if you want to show under CKC. Since they don't have a split, I don't see why you'd bother. You can still get your pup a UKC pedigree as a Canadian resident if you want and there are UKC events in Canada. Or you can just keep him with his AKIHO pedigree and not worry about it if you don't plan to show.

    Interesting some of the things they added to the DQ and faults list in CKC standard...
  • haha @poeticdragon I actually work in public affairs and lobbying ;)
    @MapleTwinkie I am starting to think, after this thread, that it is best to get all possible registration numbers from all possible bodies as you never know when you might need them LOL
Sign In or Register to comment.