A Continuing Argument
The insistence of the radical AR’ers and the humane organizations that pet overpopulation necessitates mandatory spay and neuter laws is fallacious. But for many in the dog fancy to argue that there is no problem whatsoever in these areas does little to gain credibility for the responsible breeders amongst us. Let's face it; there is basically a mismatch between the pets people think they want and the pets available at shelters. By and large, people want puppies and small dogs. The number of puppies being bred and sold each year greatly exceeds the number of dogs being euthanized in shelters. (Cats are a very different and more complicated problem than dogs and one much harder to solve.) To a great extent, the animals being euthanized in shelters are adult and larger dogs. The best shelters are probably able to place most of their adoptable dogs but the process is expensive and labor intensive. MSN laws do not usually work because these laws commonly exempt pet stores, commercial breeders with business licenses, sales by in-state puppy importers and sales by out-of-state vendors. Most owned licensed dogs which are not purebred are frequently voluntarily spayed and neutered. The MSN laws end up burdening the long-term and the hobby breeders who are the very people who do the best job in screening buyers to ensure that the puppies are going to lifetime homes. The fact that euthanization has dropped dramatically in America is oft overlooked if not ignored and lied about by the AR’ers. It ill behooves their cause to let the actual figures be known in these areas since this could result in the loss of both financial as well as psychological support. As PETA and its ilk perpetuate and distort the true story insofar as the responsible breeder is concerned, one becomes even more dismayed to hear Animal Planet take similar stands in some of its programs. The PETCO Foundation denies supporting the recent LA City MSN law notwithstanding being present for the signing of the law. Mr. Jolly of that company claims "coincidental timing." These pages trust that he is accurate in his denial. Nonetheless it is time for organizations such as the aforementioned and the food companies, too, to stand behind the reputable breeders and to defend us, as well. Keeping quiet on the subject for fear of upsetting the AR’ers is a form of acquiescence which should be unacceptable to us all.

Two Major Losses
The deaths of Muriel L. Freeman and Roger Rechler within the past ten days have cast a pall throughout the entire dog show family. Both people were powerful, influential members of the competitive world of dog show competition. Both were also heavily involved in non-dog activities as well, and both were masters in whatever endeavor they chose to undertake. Mrs. Freeman's accomplishments outside of dogs tended to the athletic, as she excelled as a golfer, equestrian and cross-country runner. Mr. Rechler will be remembered as one of the major business leaders in developing Long Island, his architectural design and savvy, his reputation as a gourmet cook and his unique collection of American literature. Ironically they were both from Long Island and had homes in New York City, as well. Within the dog world their orientations were not necessarily overlapping. Mrs. Freeman more a judge-teacher type while Mr. Rechler more competitively inclined. However, both had the common cause of promoting the welfare of the dog and both had cadres of friends and admirers. The dog world was fortunate indeed to have two people such as Muriel and Roger so devoted to its being. Our sympathies go to both of their extended families as we together with all of you mourn their loss.

Judges Who Exhibit Dogs
Of late it would appear more judges seem to be exhibiting dogs both to finish them and to special them. The practice of exhibiting homebreds either personally or with a handler is one with which these pages has no quarrel. This notwithstanding the fact that some people consider this to be a potential conflict of interest. It has long been our attitude that judges should remain actively engaged in the competitive side of the sport, as well as in helping to improve breeding stock as well. Candidly, these pages have no problem with judges specialing dogs they have bred, either. The caveat being of course in those instances that the judge is careful in handling these potentially explosive situations. Perception is the rule in any of these instances and some people seem capable of pulling the deed off successfully while others just seem to fail miserably. So long as no one can legitimately question a decision or an assignment and say that this was done as a form of favoritism because of a judge's association with a dog being exhibited, both practices are acceptable ---- not necessarily desirable but acceptable in our eyes.

The Graying Of Our Sport
As our sport "grays," when and who should step in to advise the elderly judge it is either time to quit or reduce the number of assignments they take or the numbers of dogs they adjudicate upon on a given day? Indeed, taking the problem one step further, should age play a part in considering people who run for the Board of Directors or even any club office? The time has come for AKC to actively set a policy which brings up individuals for review due to both failing health and/or age predicaments. It's not an easy problem to undertake but undertake we, each and everyone of us, must do.

Dirty Tricks
The disgusting, unfair and despicable advert PETA is running on national TV depicting AKC as a supporter of the KKK looks as though it is taken from John Grisham’s new novel The Appeal. YouTube too has posted the advert and as of 3:18 p.m. Tuesday it had 35,000 hits! Not only that, they use an AKC flag and logo as though this is an actual meeting of AKC!! This is slanderous, inflammatory and just not the case. This kind of advertising must not and cannot be allowed. It must be stopped immediately.