Quote:
Originally Posted by Mardelin  AKC's income is not dependent on Hunt Corporation (whole seller). And I'm not defending Hunt by all means. While registration of dogs do contribute somewhat to their income, dog shows are a bigger contributer.
But, that is not the point. What is being addressed is that if pet owners do register their, pet owners numbers would grow, therefore having an ability to have a voice in the direction AKC takes.
While AKC is not perfect, it is still the most desirable in upholding the purebred dog. Where others such APRI, UKC, CKC requirements have no where near the standards. |
Sorry but you will never get me to think it is okay what AKC does with volume breeders and it is not ok in my opinion.
I really do not see pet owners having a voice in the direction AKC takes until I see the Parent Clubs having more pet owners have a voice in their clubs. How many pet only members do you have in the YTCA? I think someone fully educated but does not breed/show could still offer a lot to the club.
I still see AKC as the registry I would use but I think people need to fully understand what they are about and not have blinders on. AKC is a not for profit organization that spends millions of $$$ every year for the show breeders. I just feel they should also be protecting the dogs...this is where their income comes from and I read the "Dog Press" and I read their kennel reports. You can only hide behind "we are only a registry" for to long.
I really wish pet owners would become fully educated about the whole system and demand changes to state & federal laws to protect the dogs...not just breeders.