I notice that some of the AKC Border Terriers folks are all atwitter over the fact that Oprah Winfrey is going to be doing a segment on puppy mills.
It seems that Mainline Animal Rescue sponsored a billboard four blocks from Oprah Winfrey's Harpo Studios in Chicago, which got Oprah and her producers interested in exposing the puppy mill industry in America.
Now some of the Border Terrier folks are suggesting "Oprah's new cause has the potential to negatively impact responsible breeders."
Which has me rolling on the floor laughing.
Responsible breeders in the American Kennel Club? It's an oxymoron.
The closed registry system of the American Kennel Club is one of the primary reasons the quality of Kennel Club dogs is going into the toilet.
I have written about this at some length in a post entitled Inbred Thinking, but I am hardly the first. Time magazine devoted a whole cover article to it.
So are the Border Terrier folks pushing for an open registry? They are not.
Are they pushing to pull their dog out of the AKC? They are not.
And yet, it was an open registry that created the Border Terrier, was it not?
And, for the record, it's an open registry that keeps the Patterdale Terrier a working terrier and keeps the Jack Russell Terrier working too. Just look at the "Parson Russell Terrier" if you want to see how fast the Kennel Club can wreck a breed. Astounding!
Most folks who hunt any breed of dog generally run away from Kennel Club stock. As I have noted in the past:
"The number of working dogs ruined by the AKC grows every year. Irish setters, once famed at finding birds, are now so brain-befogged they can no longer find the front door. Cocker spaniels, once terrific pocket-sized birds dogs, have been reduced to poodle-coated mops incapable of working their way through a field or fence row. Fox terriers are now so large they cannot go down a fox hole. Saint Bernards, once proud pulling dogs, are now so riddled with hip dysplasia that it's hard to find one that can walk without surgery in old age."
And don't kid yourself; it wasn't "puppy mills" or "unscrupulous backyard breeders" that did this. It was the same kind of people who are on every AKC breed list-serv; folks who do not work their dogs, and who judge a dog mostly by how many times the word "champion" shows up in its pedigree.
And so I have to laugh out loud. The Border Terrier folks are concerned that Oprah Winfrey's little show "might negatively impact responsible breeders"?!
Right. Let's be honest here for a minute, eh?
The Border Terrier community is part of the problem when it comes to the wreckage of dogs in America.
This is a Border Terrier community where almost no one actually hunts their dogs.
This is a Border Terrier community where "protect and preserve" the breed really means protect and preserve the price structure, not the true working abilities of the dogs.
And these folks now want to take inventory of Mainline Animal Rescue which seems to simply be looking to find good homes for dogs in serious distress?
Ha!
When will they take inventory of their very own AKC which subsidizes every dog show with revenue from puppy mill misery pups?
And so pardon me if I do not hyperventilate over what Mainline Animal Rescue is all about.
There is no way they could be doing any more harm to dogs than the American Kennel Club and its rosette chasers are already doing.
Of course, as is so often the case, the fish stinks from the head down. As I wrote in piece for Just Terriers magazine some years back, the "experts" you find judging AKC terrier trials are, for the most part, a laughable group of fantasists.
In the AKC, for example, most judges are experts in a half dozen breeds. In the terrier ring, it's almost a guarantee none has ever owned a Deben collar or cut a shoulder into a trench in order to get down another two feet. As a rule these authorities are experts by dint of having spent far too many nights in bad hotels attending show trials. In 20 years of owning dogs, they have logged a thousand miles bouncing around show rings in plaid skirts and blue blazers. They may have driven to the moon and back to pick up rosettes, but few have driven 10 miles out into the country to even see a fox den, much less put a dog down one or dig to it.
A few will claim expertise because they have bought an airplane ticket and attended a mounted hunt or two in the U.K.. They have seen "the real thing" they will tell you, and know what is required of a working dog thanks to their two-week vacation in Scotland! Just don't ask them how to extract quarry from the stop-end of a pipe or how to treat a bite wound.
And so you will pardon me if I am laughing because the Border Terrier community is all atwitter over the fact that Oprah would dare to talk about puppy mills.
My God, she she might talk about the long-standing nexus between puppy mills and the American Kennel Club.
She might talk about how many AKC misery pups it takes to subsidize an AKC rosette.
Damn, I hope so! Bring it on Oprah!!
I do not fear Oprah's expose of the dog breeding business in this country, any more than I fear the morons and lunatics at PETA. Oprah, at least, might do a little good.
No, I do not fear Oprah.
What I fear are rosette chasers at the American Kennel Club and the scores of thousands of nodding know-nothings and "hump and dump" breeders who say their goal is to "protect and preserve" a breed with a closed registry system.God save us from them!
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
44Some related posts on this blog:
- AKC Loves Puppy Mills ... and the Naïve
- AKC Depends on Puppy Mills to Subsidize Shows
- A Terrible Beauty: The Ugly Side of Show Dogs (Time magazine)
- The Kennel Club Wrecks More Than Terriers
- Inbred Thinking
- The AKC and Working Dogs
- Hump and Dump Dog Breeders
- Joe Bowman's Patterdale
- A Bit More on the Border-Patterdale Connection
- Old and New Border Terriers?
- Autopsy of a Standard (Border Terrier)
- The Thin Portfolio of the Working Border Terrier
- Out of the Ring and Into the Den
- The Saints of Rescue
- Overbreeding: Beware of Simple Answers
.
13 comments:
I think you're kind of missing the point.
I have a breed (Basenjis) that had the AKC stud book opened to unregistered and unpedigreed dogs in 1990, done by request of the parent club. My program is heavily into those land race dogs. I'm sort of a "genetic diversity breeder."
The concern is for unworkable legislation that makes it impossible for anyone to breed dogs. You're in Virginia, right? There has been legislation proposed in Virginia every year for the past several years that would essentially make it impossible for people to breed dogs.
Okay, clue moment - most of these laws make it HARDER to breed working dogs than to breed show dogs. You should worry more than the kennel club set, not less.
If you get into "all breeders are bad" heavy-duty breeder regulation, what dogs are most vulnerable to mandatory s/n? The type of dogs I consider more precious than gold - dogs like our new foundation stock from Africa, especially the unregistered land race dogs, or working dogs, especially dogs without a registry or with a small registry.
I know exactly how badly these laws can hurt efforts to breed for more genetic diversity, because I have agonized over what they can do to efforts like ours. Most of these laws limit breeding to "recognized registries" with no exemption whatsoever for value for genetic diversity or for working dogs.
You need to worry about it too, not think it's someone else's problem.
The merits (or otherwise) of open vs closed stud book, and of dogs that work versus dogs that don't, and the arguments about the practicality of providing 8 million or so dogs per year from working parents in today's society where most people wouldn't recognize a working dog if it bit them on the butt, are really different issues. Issues I'm familiar with, I'll add.
When you get to people who think all deliberate breeding is bad, the laws apply regardless. Doesn't matter if I'm a show breeder, a "genetic diversity native stock breeder," a working breeder, or anything else. Being on the side of the angels doesn't count for squat in this fight.
Lisa C-A
I have to say, I am really looking forward to this Oprah episode.
As far as I'm concerned, we need something on a large scale (i.e., the millions of folks who watch Oprah) that shows people THIS is what is "behind-the-scenes" at your local Debbie's Petland. People just don't get it!
I don't care if it paints the "responsible" breeders with the same damn brush. It's not a concern of mine, even though I may 'responsibly breed' dogs myself someday. Oprah's a loony tune anyway who was/is currently involved with HSUS/PETA, from what I've read.
Anything that makes laypeople *think* about where they are purchasing a dog is a big, big, big, big, big step in the right direction. And it's the Oprah fans who are probably of the same demographic of people who make impulse puppy buys.
.
Lisa, I have to say your comments are pretty far off the topic.
In fact, they are SO far off the mark, I had to check to see what post you were adding a comment to.
You go on at great length about mandatory spay-neuter. Let me ask you a question: Do you think this post is about mandatory spay-neuter?
Really?
Where do I talk about mandatory spay-neuter? Where do I defend that?
In fact, not only have I not supported mandatory spay-neuter, I have written a pretty solid piece as to why such legislation is counterproductive. Read it -- it's actually the last link on "some related posts," or you can go directly to the link at >> http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2007/03/overbreeding-beware-of-simple-answers.html
Is Oprah talking about mandatory spay-neuter? I did not see that in the promos of this show on her web site. See >> http://www.oprah.com/world/global/slide/200804/global_20080404_101.jhtml
Is Mainline Animal Rescue promoting mandatory spay-neuter on their web site? I have not see that, and I looked.
So what is going on with your commentary? It sounds to me like you are so gung-ho to defend the AKC that you simply changed the topic.
And here's the topic: Why does your beloved AKC continue to do business with puppy mills?
Why does the AKC, which you support, give puppy mills special deals and services?
And why does the AKC close breed registries as quickly as they can -- a situation that GUARANTEES inbreeding over time?
And what are YOU doing about it?
As to the notion that working dogs are threatened by legislation in Virginia, you will pardon me while I laugh just a little bit. Come on down to this state and I can give you a tour. The Fox Hound is the state dog. We are the most hunting people on the planet, and PETA and the rest do not make a PEEP in this state for fear of getting shot (and no, that is not a euphemism). People *propose* legislation all the time in every state, and there's a small cadre of good people who enjoy "ringing the fire alarm" every time anyone anywhere introduces stupid legislation (all good), but the truth is that most of the bad stuff never gets out of committee, and the stuff that does make it into law is generally not too bad.
Here's a question for you: Are you opposed to kennel inspection for folks who keep more than 20 breeding dogs? I am not. And, quite frankly, I do not think anyone who gives a damn about dogs would be opposed to such legislation. If you cannot keep a reasonably clean kennel with water in the bowls, meat on the dogs, daily excercise, decent shelter (and heat in winter), then you need to get out of the business.
And yes, breeding dogs is a business. It sound like it might be your business. Is it?
And, for the record, I have no problem with that. Nor do I have problem with non-working breeds (which I certainly consider the Basenji to be).
The border terrier, however is supposed to be a *working* terrier. It says so right in the breed description. And yet almost no one in the AKC works their border terriers, do they? As far as I know, not one American fox was dug to last year with an AKC border terrier. A pretty sad state of affairs, and something that makes a mockery of a Club that purports to be tryng to protect a working breed.
THAT was the topic of this post.
And you missed it.
Patrick
Hi Patrick -
I'll go slowly and go over more points, so you can connect the dots. I thought the connections were obvious.
The concerns being expressed about impact on "responsible breeders" -- including some expressed by rescuers in my breed -- are about an inadvertent backlash if the Oprah show confuses mass breeding in bad conditions with all breeding of any sort.
The specific quote that has raised concern was Oprah's comment (paraphrasing) "Now that I know what I know, I will only adopt from the shelter." The concern was that something good could be made into something bad (condemning all breeders.)
Most people, including myself, are waiting to see what happens and hoping for the best.
Those concerns are specifically concerns about not distinguishing between people who breed a small number of dogs, health test, and take them back at any point in their lives, rather than people who breed large numbers of dogs in poor conditions. See Peta, ABC campaign.
I live in Virginia. My personal and immediate concern is specifically about confusion between the two reviving mandatory s/n for all dogs except "approved" breeding stock, which has been proposed in the state every year for about the past 5 or 6 years.
I have been downtown. I have talked with legislators. If you are under the impression that the really bad dog laws (many of them well-meant, but really bad nonetheless) are not passing because they don't have a chance here, you are living in a dream world.
Small aside, this past year, I was told by a legislative aide, when I expressed concern about a bill that would hurt working dog breeders, as it had no workable exemptions for such, "But you're exempt, aren't you?"
I think an expose of bad breeding conditions is valuable in raising public awareness. That's a really good thing. I am worried about whether any distinction will be made between all breeders and bad breeders. If no distinction is made, there are very valid reasons for concern.
No, breeding dogs is not necessarily a business. Businesses make money, or at least try to. IN particular, dogs are not my business. I am completely at a loss as to where you came up with that idea. I have a good job, much of which income goes to support my dogs.
I have no idea where you got the idea that Basenjis are a non-working breed - while they are, for the most part, such in this country (as their work involves subsistence hunting, driving game into nets to be dispatched by spears) we have dogs in this country who were born in the DRC and had working parents from traditional villages. There are also a few people here who use Basenjis to hunt. B's are a working dog that doesn't have its traditional work available in this country.
I'm not sure what the point is about inspections for 20 or more breeding dogs. If you're referring to SB538, the limit is 30 or more breeding females, not 20 dogs of either sex. Is that the reference? It does not remotely apply to me. There will be ice skating in Hades before I get 20 intact adult dogs s - and I would likely see divorce court before my husband would tolerate me having 30 intact females at the house, particularly as he helps take care of the dogs.
As for AKC, I have no influence at all on AKC. What am I doing about genetic diversity? Breeding for it. Breeding native dogs, their 100% native dog descendents, and supporting the importation and breeding of new native dogs, registered or not. I can't change more than my little corner of the universe, but I do try to take care of that.
I obviously agree with you that closed stud books are not doing dogs a favour and the dog snobs do not care about dogs the way most of us do.
However, I do agree with Anonymous in that you have to think it through.
The ONLY breeders who will emerge unscathed from the latest propaganda campaign by Peta/H$U$ are those same commercial breeders, high volume, who are stocking the retail outlets. They will get the licences, etc, and because they generate money, will be treated differently from the amateur, using that in the true sense of the word.
Therefore, anyone who breeds unregistered working types will be labeled a 'backyard breeder' because that is what a lot of them are - and I don't actually have a problem with that.
When the crackdowns, limit laws, mandatory neutering, breeding permits, intrusive inspections, anti-containment, yada yada come into play, it won't be Hunte the bunchers or the Pups R We crowd who suffers.
If Oprah weren't having Pacelle on as a guest, I wouldn't be concerned about the message that will get out to her very impressionable (and poorly informed) audience.
The focus really needs to be on turning people away from retail, not turning them away period.
As for breeders, well I'm into Toys now by happenstance. Their work is being pets, has been for a long time. Is that wrong? I love my little monkeys - they were well raised by a caring person, there are no health issues, they are funny, lovely little things. They also catch the odd mouse and chase away the squirrels. I adore them and it's mutual.
I've adopted my share of charming, handsome, wickedly funny big lug mutts over the years and I love those dogs too, every last one of them.
However, depending on the spin, they too may be at risk because the AR campaign to render dogs extinct is well underway.
There's a big difference between AR and AW, a world of difference in fact.
We have to be careful of that for which we wish is all I'm saying.
And as for bad, well, 'breed' (ha!) bans come to mind...
.
What the hell are you people prattling on about?
Who is talking about mandatory spay-neuter? NO ONE!
This is topic being raised up in order to take the focus off of FACT that the AKC makes a HUGE chunk of money from puppy mills.
Are you writing about that?
No.
Are you talking about that?
No.
And why not?
Why is the subject being changed?
It's not because Oprah is talking about mandatory spay-neuter, is it? Not apparently.
It's not like anyone else on this show is talking about mandatory spay-neuter, is it? No, not apparently.
So what the hell are you people prattling on about?
Oh right. You are AFRAID that people will adopt more animals from shelters rather than "going to a responsible breeder" (whatever that is).
If that is your fear, then get a grip.
Adopting more dogs from shelters is the RIGHT thing to do, and is it ESPECIALLY the right thing to do if you are simply looking for a pet to greet you at the door, fetch a ball, and go on walks with you. ANY dog can do that.
Oprah's show is about PUPPY MILLS, and I HOPE that she will talk about HOW MUCH MONEY THE AKC gets from PUPPY MILLS every year.
And yes, I hope she will talk about how many puppy mills are in Virginia. Tons of them. And, for the record, the Human Society has done good work exposing Virginia puppy mills. Hear that? Good work!
I take a back seat to no one bashing HSUS and PETA, but they are not wrong on every point, are they?
So, to bring it back to the topc: How much money DID the AKC make from MISERY PUPPIES LAST YEAR?
An exactly how many dead misery puppies are those show ribbons worth?
Patrick
Patrick, your post started off talking about Oprah's show and what people are worried about. You suggested they were worried about something that, frankly, has nothing whatsoever to do with most people's concerns.
What people I've talked to were worried about (BTW, I've already heard from a friend in Canada that the show is a good one and that it DID NOT do this) was that it would give a message that all breeders are bad, feeding calls for mandatory s/n and breeder licensing for small breeders.
These posts are not off topic - they are a direct response to your comment "'Oprah's new cause has the potential to negatively impact responsible breeders.' Which has me rolling on the floor laughing."
It wasn't something to laugh off. Their concern was a legitimate one, and SIMILAR CONCERNS I HAD HEARD VOICED - INCLUDING BY RESCUE PEOPLE IN MY BREED - WERE SPECIFICALLY ABOUT MANDATORY S/N AND BREEDER LICENSING gaining traction, and hurting responsible breeders, if Oprah, with her influence, made no distinction between breeders.
You raised the topic of why people were worried about Oprah yourself. I'm sorry if we didn't respond to the part of your post that you WANT us to talk about, but we responded to the part where we had an opinion we wanted to express. That's what happens when you allow comments on blogs.
Responding to your post, even if it's not the part of your post that you think is most important, is not changing the subject.
And please don't bring up ridiculous slams like "you're afraid people will adopt more animals from the shetler." I would be thrilled if Oprah's show increased shelter adoptions, WHICH I AGREE IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
I don't agree with your implication that any dog is necessarily suitable for any person - I do think there is a legitimate place for people to prefer certain kinds of dogs, whether a certain breed or simply a certain type. I do agree, strongly, that we need to work harder to get shelter dogs in good homes, and that most make wonderful pets.
My point was and is that, given how the press often handles dog issues, caution is never a bad idea. From what I've heard, the show was a good one. I haven't seen it yet, but if what I've heard is correct, it's a very good show and a positive force.
My thought is that, in considering people's concerns about public opinions of breeders, you need to keep one thing in mind -- just because something can hurt the AKC DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT CAN'T HURT PEOPLE LIKE YOURSELF.
Lisa
You're right -- the AKC has been cozying up to the puppy mills for about 50 years. At their board meeting about 18 months ago or so they said they needed the puppy mill money to makeup for lost money from shows and events and they said they would continue to do business with the puppy mills because they needed the cash. No one in the breed clubs said boo -- they only objected to the fact that the AKC had made the deal with the pet store folks explicit and on paper. The Cavalier King Charles Spaniel folks broke with the AKC over puppy mills a while back (15 years?), but the AKC just created another breed Club to replace them. Look it up if you can; someone surely wrote that up somewhere.
I looked up the Virginia legislation - HB538 - and it seems to only cover people with 20 breeding bitches and more than 50 dogs total. Any operation that size should be inspected by the locals IMO. Hard to see controversy there. The legislation appear to be commonsense, and I note it has gotten huge levels of support in a conservative state.
I think a lot of folks get so roiled up in anti-HSUS and PETA stuff they don't take time to focus on the real problems that really exist in the world of dogs. Doing nothing means defending the same old stuff we have now -- 60 percent kill rates in county shelters, rising levels of genteic mess in purebred dogs, the newspapers full of puppy ads, and horrible conditions in a lot of commercial breeding facilities pushing puppies on the internet and at pet stores. The internet is where the puppy mill mess is turning to. Anyone selling a dog to folks sight unseen is suspect in my book.
- David
If I understand you correctly, Lisa, Oprah's show did NOT turn out to be about about anything you feared, and your post had NOTHING to do with I wrote, or what Oprah's show was actually about. Your whole post was completely off-topic, and driven by your own paranoia rather than any real examination of what Oprah had put up on her web site about what the show was actually going to be about?
Gotcha!
But I am the one that is supposed to be cautious?
Ha! No, I don't think I will be cautious about the AKC. Nor will I be cautious about puppy mills, nor will I be cautious about dog fighting. I know EXACTLY what I think about these things and why. I am not confused that one thing is another, or that they are somehow related by imaginary dotted lines in some (unnamed) person's mind.
Nor am I confused that there is such a thing as a "responsible breeder" in a small-based closed registry system where show ring championships are valued above all else.
And YES, I am more than OK with legislation to inspect kennels with more than 20 breeding bitches (and 50 dogs) in them, and I am more than OK with bans on dog fighting.
And NO, I am not OK with the American Kennel Club promoting dogs bred in a closed registry system that leads to genetic wreckage, and I am not OK with the "big wink" of Kennel Club rosette chasers ignoring the fact that their "hobby" is subsidized by the misery and blood of puppy mill dogs living their entire lives in wire cages smaller than a love seat.
No, I will not be cautious about that, and I will not be silent.
YOU can be silent about it, of course.
It is a free country and there is right to free speech, and that includes the right to say nothing at all about such things even when they are brought up on blogs like this, or on shows like Oprah's.
Go on and whistle past the real problem (say nothing, say nothing) while inventing other ones that are not actually there.
You have that right.
But silence in this case is not golden. It is wrong. And it is a moral choice. Your choice. I have made a different choice, I am happy to have made it.
Patrick
Wow, I didn't expect this reaction.
Let me explain.
The H$U$, as an AR organization, actively promotes mandatory neutering, among other things. Agreed?
The CEO for the H$U$, that AR shill formerly of Peta, was one of the key guests on the show. Agreed?
With over 25 Bills up in the US proposing mandatory juvenile neutering, worrying about the planned message is completely legitimate.
I watched the show, and while not thrilled, wasn't nearly so angry as I expected to be.
Old footage we've all seen, yada yada. Old sayings, old news overall. However, if it reaches the audience it needs to reach, good.
However, the repetition of the neutering mantra was annoying. It was all good, according to whomever the vet was on the show. That's not true at all, there are a lot of health concerns and there are ways to improve long term outcomes without abandoning neutering.
The 'shelters are overcrowded because of pet overpopulation' meme was presented. It's untrue, but maybe it won't stick. Neutering compliance is at an all-time high and most shelters are importing dogs because there aren't any around for adoption.
I was pleased to see that Wayne kept it down and made some sense for a change. Relieved, actually because absolute nonsense has a way of becoming truth these days, and very quickly.
Maybe that's because the Oprah people were scanning all the blogs, etc, looking for stuff about H$U$. Good.
Anyway, sorry if the topic I thought was pertinent wasn't what you thought was the key issue.
That's the way it goes sometimes, eh?
I've never bred a dog in my life and all my pets have been neutered. I'm very much in favour of people getting dogs from shelters, always suggest it as a good bet - especially for the novice.
Oh and we always say that if a message is misunderstood, it's not the fault of the recipient - it's the fault of the sender.
Patrick, my comment was an explanation about why people would be worried.
I specifically noted that I myself was withholding judgment.
My comment was that people's concerns were not ludicrous.
Calling you on misinterpreting why people would be worried is not off topic. You said it. Expect a response.
My concern, bluntly, is that blithe ignorance about why people would be concerned about dog laws is going to hurt me, and the dogs I care about.
Since you live in Virginia, you might want to get a little more information. The legal concerns here are not dogfighting or licensing commercial breeders.
You might want to stop and wonder why you are wasting your time attacking a GENETIC DIVERSITY BREEDER who supported opening the AKC stud book in 1990 and who is supporting reopening it again, and who has supported concepts of genetic diversity in purebred dog breeding for nearly two decades, and who has been working to get the word out about them.
Also, your prejudices aside, as a breeder and sometime rescuer, I can tell you there is a world of difference between a responsible breeder who health tests, takes dogs back, and educates the public, versus someone who is solely money driven.
Even when I don't always agree with their breeding approach, the difference is HUGE.
It appears that the concept of MEANINGFUL CHANGE FROM WITHIN hasn't crossed your mind. I believe things will change. We've already accomplished more change our way (a reopening of the AKC stud book to unpedigreed, unregistered dogs in 1990) than you have with your blog.
And we're working on getting the AKC stud book reopened again, to add more genetic diversity.
Maybe you should fuss at THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ACTUALLY PROBLEMS, Patrick.
Lisa
I still stand amazed that people feak out when they see HSUS or PETA. I bash these organization pretty routinely as you know, but I am not SCARED of these folks. Are you **scared**?
Last week I called PETA's general counsel a punk. I have challenged HSUS to open up their books so that people can fully understand where their direct mail money goes to. I am not scared of these people; they are a joke. They are fools.
But they are well-meaning fools, and at times they do good work.
And the puppy mill front is one of those.
Lord knows, it's not like the AKC (the organization you folks are paying your money to) does ANY good work the pupy mill arena.
None. They collect MILLIONS of blood-soaked dollars from puppy mills and use them to subsidize rosette chases.
And yet you turn a blind eye to that. Not once have the commentators to this post mentioned that the AKC collects MILLIONS of dollars a year from the puppy mill industry, even though it was the main point of the post.
Is the silence because you feel complicit in the puppy mill deaths because you have not known or done nothing about it in the past? Or is it because you are afraid that if you speak up you will get black-balled in your breed club or by the AKC? Or is it something else? I am all ears. Do you think puppy mills are no big deal and it's pefectly fine for the AKC to create a market for misery puppies? If so, say it. Do you think its OK for puppy mills to exist so that show fees and litter regisration costs are kept down by a few dollars? If so, say it.
And if you think the AKC should stop greenlighting puppy mill registrations, say that too.
Because so far you haven't said that.
And sorry Caveat, my post was not the problem. If you come into my living room and hear voices, that's not my fault. I did not ONCE mention mandatory spay-neutering. That was a voice in your head. And for that, I am not responsible.
As for Virginia legislation, be sure to tell me what I am supposed to be worried about. Because, to tell you the truth, I follow this stuff pretty closely, and I am not worried at all.
Patrick
I'm not afraid of Peta or the H$US per se, I mock and criticize them all the time.
I'm afraid that my grandchildren won't have dogs because there won't be any dogs for them to have, mutts or purebred.
I'm worried about the huge amount of money the H$U$ collects from naive, well meaning folk who think they are about animal welfare, which they aren't. They're animal rights.
These people have insinuated themselves into the legislative process and have set themselves up as experts whom the media believe speak for dog owners.
As for the puppy mill thing, they act as if they own it but there are a lot of genuine animal welfare orgs out there who have been on the forefront of that issue for a lot longer than the H$U$ has.
Louisville
AB1634
Albuquerque
San Francisco
Breed bans
Mandatory neutering
Pet limits
Property requirements
Anti-containment laws
I soon expect anti-cropping, anti-docking to appear over here. It all starts in the UK, after all.
When they aren't out in the open, they're lobbying behind the scenes.
I'm no fan of the big kennel clubs/registries either and I'd like to shut down every commercial breeder on the continent but there's no way I'll ever support the H$U$ - who got control of the name in a rather interesting way, I'm told.
But I'm sure everybody knows about that.
Post a Comment