If ever there was an overreaction and a case of “little red hen, the sky is falling,” it is in those instances where certain journalists, delegates and general individuals who live in ivory towers and ignore the reality of real life seem to have misread exactly what is going on at AKC with regard to breeders, puppy mills and the commercial world generally. If anyone seriously believes that the Board specifically or even generally is catering to puppy mills, brokers and/or dealers, they are either being deliberately misled or are misstating the case entirely. I am not here to defend AKC or to necessarily condemn it either. Since the great majority, nay overwhelming preponderance, of DOG NEWS readers are AKC-oriented people of necessity, much of the reaction and articles by our writers, present company included, revolve around matters AKC. As a longtime breeder, exhibitor and follower of AKC—for over 40 years now—I have witnessed many dramatic changes within the organization. Without a doubt, the most significant to my mind has been the successful attempts at humanizing and involving the corporation in regard to matters of the dog on every level of American life. AKC is now much more—and properly so—the spokesperson for all matters canine in today's society than ever before. And in my opinion, this is the direction AKC should be going and succeeding in doing. It is becoming an inclusive canine organization truly concerned with the health and welfare of dogs owned by all Americans. Compare this philosophy to that of two decades ago and even the strictest constructionist will admit to that fact. Whether, in fact, they are happy with this direction is another matter entirely.
Candidly, the complexity of these philosophic changes has caused—and continues to cause—confusion within the ranks of AKC's loyal constituency. As many of you will most definitely recall, within the past 10 years there were those who insisted that AKC was not doing enough to ensure the purity of the stud book. An argument one rarely, if ever, hears today. Indeed, as a result of that argument and all the attendant negative publicity, AKC not only took steps to counter these arguments, but it implemented programs of inspection. This both discouraged and prevented puppy millers (farmers) from registering their dogs with AKC. These successful moves on the part of AKC resulted in a huge growth in competitive registries that in fact were—and remain—totally lenient in these areas. With the growth of these competitive registries came the decline of AKC-registered dogs. Conversely, these same people who were so pro-inspections, which resulted in the formation of competitive registries, are the same people who are opposed to AKC finding other means of economic development. Probably AKC's biggest undeveloped resource is in its name itself—The American Kennel Club. If the corporation was to survive, its planners realized and anticipated not only the need to take advantage of its name economically but also the need to make the value of an AKC-registered dog more meaningful with the American public. It also has to reach out and try to get back those elements within the dealer and broker organizations that also recognize the need for humane conditions in the raising and breeding of dogs. While some may argue this is self-defeating practically, it makes good sense to reach out to all breeders in hopes of promoting the general welfare of the dog itself! After all, should a food company not sell food to a commercial breeder or dealer? Or should the food company work for the betterment of the dog by reaching out to these people as well?
Well, now for what caused this horn blowing. Does anyone really think, the way a writer wrote last week, that AKC is ignoring or treating the breeder, its very constituency, as a second-class citizen? Or that the longtime breeder is being discriminated against in favor of the commercial breeder? Get a life, would you? Sure, some lower-level individual messed up the R&R, Chapter 3, Section 4 and it went unnoticed where it should have been noticed. Does that error condemn an entire system and philosophy? I think not. The ad, placed in an auctioneer's publication, was an attempt to dilute rather than enforce the auctioneer's publication. From where I sit, I would have turned down the AKC's advert rather than accept it the way the publisher did. The truth was that the AKC was clever in doing this, as it reached people with a message they would otherwise have never received. As for brazenly “promoting the way puppy mill dogs are raised,” how about stating one example where this occurred! Show the facts for that statement, that's a given! Or else don't make these kinds of accusations.
Whether or not AKC has gone after the small breeder with an intensity this writer would like to see is an ongoing argument. There is always room for improvement in that area. Certainly the monthly PUPPIES magazine was a step in the right direction. Some of the ideas suggested in that article should be implemented. Many were on one basis or another already implemented, while other positive decisions were totally ignored.
Commercialism is the new area in which the arch reactionary to progress is now arguing his or her case. Well, I say until one can compromise and find room to work with ALL breeders for the general welfare of the dog, the business people at AKC have to be selective. And if the means of selectivity remain around commercialism to both save the corporation and to promote the welfare of the dog, so be it! AKC had its second best financial year in its history last year, with lower registrations. Someone must be doing something right economically, while even the most nit-picking of people must agree that AKC has never had a better image with the American public than it has now.
Some more passing on of information about Crufts. The largest numbers of international visitors to sign in at the lounge were the Canadians, with 500-plus signatures. The United States was second with 285, The Netherlands 283, Belgium 251, Australia 121, Germany 109 and Sweden 103. Of course, think of the numbers that did not sign in and you realize there were a lot of visitors from foreign countries at the show. The International Junior Handling Contest was awarded to a South African, 17-year-old Cait Pansegrouw. Second was Emma McKay from Australia and third to James Hammond of Ireland. Liz Cartledge is in charge of this event, and as usual, she was a most able coordinator. Insofar as Crufts is concerned, yes, of course it is a dog show, but it is also one of the largest trade shows for dog-related items you will find anywhere in the world. Ancillary events revolve around various dog-related charities and organizations. Perhaps the most important to the very existence of Crufts are the Gameskeepers Classes. It is my understanding that without these classes there would be no Crufts show at all! And, yes, where AKC could easily take a really good lesson from TKC is in the development of its Young Kennel Club. I would send Mari-Beth O'Neill over there to study that operation and then implement a similar program as would be appropriate to the U.S.
I hate thank yous, since one usually leaves out too many people, but special thanks on our behalf to Ronnie Irving, Rose Smart, Vanessa McAlpin, Sue Sampson, Cas Oakes and Phil Buckley of The Kennel Club; Kay Clarkson and Ben Ashcroft of Pet Partners Insurance and their “mean” boss, John Spurling. And, of course, last but hardly least, all the ladies who host the International Lounge. They are just the best. •