We may have yawed a bit, but not drifted. The thread is AKC's involvement with mills. This thread has really served to catalog that and other abuses of the trust placed in them. They have clearly chosen profit over ethics with catering to millers, cruising dog auctions for business and corrupting their own stud books.

In the case of the Canadian breeder, the worst thing I saw was the AKC inserting a different stud's name on 7 litters even though they knew it was bogus. The ethical thing to have done was to pull the regs. on all the litters. Someone was clearly trying to profit on the breeder's stud and AKC aided in that. Why not let the chips fall where they may? The blame for the original mess was the one that used the stud w/out consent. Why did AKC have to compound the problem? $$$$..maybe? Their behavior, IMO, gives a green light to shady breeders. Hey, if the registry's doing it, why can't I? is the message being sent.

I really liked your earlier post. A registry that used those ideas would be on the path to being an ideal registry. I'm not sure the AKC would be interested in doing things that might cost them registrations, though, as evidenced by their current priorities. They have, IMO, drifted away from their own core values and abused the trust placed in them. In light of the behavior of the AKC shown in this thread, are they really any better than the 'alternative' registries?

I don't know how to prompt change at the AKC. What do you do with a registry that has aligned itself with 'volume breeders' and falsified its own stud books? They seem to want both the cachet of being the premier registry and the revenue of millers. I don't think they can have it both ways.

This issue is really troubling to me. I'm just at the point of working to become an exhibitor and hope to have an entrant this year. I know if I show in any venue that isn't AKC sanctioned, any ch. status would be perceived as not so meaningful. An AKC award would hold less meaning for me personally, though. Why would I seek approval from a group that I, at this moment, am not proud to be a part of? I'm seriously considering registering with UKC and just not looking back. I don't want to have to hold my nose if I were to be fortunate enough to finish a dog.

The only possible way I can see to deliver a wake up call to the AKC is for exhibitors to not participate in their events. It's the prestige of the conformation shows that gives AKC a large part of its credibility. They use that perceived credibility and the status from that and then pimp it out by courting millers. I think it's disgusting and I believe they would see the writing on the wall pretty quick if they gave a show and no one came.

Well I so emphasize with many of your points. First though and of course the problem is to organize a revolt, or mass protest if you will. AKC has only breed clubs, if every breed club of at least 80% of breed clubs sent the same strongly worded letter, with a list of requirements and consequences, then advised all their members if not met, to pull out of all shows for three months, maybe just maybe that would be the wake up call the AKC needed.

You are right the breed clubs, and their members give legitmacy to the AKC after all they are the Pure Bred Registry and if The Pure Bred Clubs pull out of AKC and enmasse say .. register with UKC or NAKC and take their own stud books with them.... how could the AKC survive. Maybe they have lost sight of just who they were created to represent.

I also wonder if the AKC looks to these "volumne breeders" for standard or health changes?
You do know the way a standard is changed is if the breed club after securing a majority vote of their membership recommends those changes.

Woogie Man, I have to say that I am really impressed that you are struggling with these questions, and not just saying, "that's the way it is, and I want to show dogs."

I am not nearly as close as you are, but I have wanted to register Thor eventually to get a Good Citizen status, and possibly compete in certain events... I will have to think about this as well.

In terms of what we can do: well, it's a big problem, and I'd honestly be surprised if any one of us had an enormous effect. I do think it's VERY important to act in accordance with your own values, because that's the situation where you have the most control.

I know it's something of a cliche, but I do think that bringing awareness helps... I really, truly believe that if more Americans were aware of the disgusting conditions dogs were bred in, that mills would disappear within a few years. All that has to happen is for people to stop buying from pet stores. I don't understand why this hasn't happened already, but (I've said this before), I believe it can be like "dolphin safe" tuna. Nobody cared, and then one day, everyone did. And that was that.

Gail, I truly appreciate your input on this subject. You realize, as I do, that AKC draws its strength and credibility from the breed clubs and not from # of registrations. A coordinated effort on their part, such as letters with demands for action or withdrawal from their events would be that cold slap in the face that AKC desperately needs. If that didn't work, I'm sure the world wouldn't stop turning if AKC withered away.

I would imagine it wouldn't take every breed club participating to force the AKC's hand. The mother clubs for the top 10 breeds could have a tremendous impact. I would hope that they (the breed clubs) could see beyond their immediate self interests and do something as a matter of principle. They shouldn't be afraid to upset the applecart since, in this case, the breed clubs ARE the applecart.

All breed clubs have as their primary goal the betterment of the breed. How that goal is aided by associating with a registry that is doing such things is beyond me. The AKC is very good at couching what they're doing in benign terms but their actions speak louder than their words.

As to your last paragraph, I have seen where an AKC official suggested that top breeders should consider allowing their studs to be used by 'volume breeders' in order to improve the quality of their stock. That says a lot about what they're attempting. If, by some rationale, they could get top breeders working with millers, then these breeders and millers would have common interests. The long term consequences of that are frightening. Puppy mills certainly bring harm to any breed and attempts to unite them with those dedicated to the betterment of the breed is ludicrous. The AKC can't walk the fence on this one and must come down on one side or the other. They seem to have made their choice and I have to wonder if they're worth the effort to reform them or if they should be cast apart from the breed clubs. The clubs could certainly survive without the AKC. Could the AKC do the same?

Believe me, it's less of a struggle the more I think about it. With the stuff that's been dug up here, it has become much more a black and white issue for me. I don't see a huge grey area.

Awareness can change any issue, sometimes very quickly. Your analogy with dolphin safe tuna illustrates that point perfectly.

What can the average person do? In this case, you could register your dog with UKC and support them. The more I find out about that registry, the more I like it.

The owner of UKC is a former vice president of the AKC. This is a registry that's over 100 years old as is no fly-by-night operation. I'm sure you read the post about their puppy mill policy, which that alone is in stark contrast to AKC.

Here's a little something about the UKC you may find interesting.

*************************************

"The United Kennel Club, the second oldest purebred dog registry in the US, has been sold to Wayne Cavanaugh by Connie G. Miller, former UKC CEO and widow of longtime owner and president Fred T. Miller.

Cavanaugh, former vice-president with the American Kennel Club, has been acting president of UKC since Fred Miller’s death earlier this year.

UKC was founded in 1898 by Chauncey Bennett, a dog fancier who wanted a registry that concentrated on the working ability of dogs as well as their adherence to a physical standard. At the time, the American Kennel Club, a nonprofit organization, had been in existence for 14 years. Although usually overshadowed by AKC whenever purebred dogs are discussed or exhibited, UKC hosts about 10,000 events each year1 and registers about 250,000 dogs of more than 300 breeds and varieties.2 In contrast to AKC, however, most UKC events are working dog sports or competitions such as coonhound field trials, retriever and Beagle field trials, and obedience and agility competitions. Few all-breed conformation shows are held by UKC’s 1300 clubs, but many clubs hold specialty competitions for a single breed or a specified set of breeds. UKC also publishes three magazines: Bloodlines, Coonhound Bloodlines, and Hunting Retriever.

In spite of its smaller size and lower profile, UKC has pioneered several innovations in dog registries, some of which were later adopted by AKC. Chief among them are the use of genetic testing to identify individual dogs; establishment of the State Canine Awareness Network to keep tabs on anti-dog legislation and promote reasonable dog control laws; a code of ethics for breeders; and emphasis on owner participation instead of professional handling for dogs in conformation shows. UKC was also the first registry to include agility in its repertoire of events and still remains the only major registry to accept mixed breed dogs in agility and obedience competitions.

In the past seven years, AKC has recognized several breeds formerly registered only by UKC and the breeds’ national clubs, including the American Eskimo Dog, the Anatolian Shepherd, Greater Swiss Mountain Dog, Australian Shepherd, Canaan Dog, Jack Russell Terrier, German Pinscher, Border Collie, and Cavalier King Charles Spaniel".

***********************************

From this link....

Dog Owner's Guide: UKC sold

Woogie, thanks for posting the information on the UKC. I was watching a field trail show last night and loved watching the dogs work...doing what they were bred to do.

During your travels through UKC it will be interesting if you find anything about breeding for health above everything else.

I do want to add education is important and what people chose to do with the information shows the true values a person holds in their hearts. There will be some that will just take the approach "I am just one person and I can't change a thing" to people who take small steps to help the problem to other people who take big steps. To do nothing is a telling story to me.

I am not convienced that people really care about other people's animals but at least the information is out there for people to read. I do think people can watch/read about legal issues and write their politicians to help change things. I know people say we have to many laws now lets just enforce them but something doesn't smell right because it is just not happening. People need to dig into the issues to really try and understand why these things continue to happen.

I applaud everyone who contributed to this thread and to everyone who read this thread. I wish more people had commented and put their thoughts down but information is now down in one place so ideas and thoughts can be added.

I want to add a little more info about the UKC being sold. This happened in 2000. Wayne Cavanaugh, the current owner, has been with UKC since 1999. I just wanted to emphasize that point as Cavanaugh is a former V.P. of AKC. Though there are some things that have been wrong at AKC for some time, Cavanaugh wasn't there for the roll out of the volume breeders plan.

Here's a little something about it....

***************************************

"November 15, 2000. Kalamazoo, MI. Mrs. Connie G. Miller, former U.K.C. CEO and widow of Fred T. Miller, announced today that the ownership of the United Kennel Club has been transferred from the Trust of Fred T. Miller to U.K.C. President, Wayne R. Cavanaugh. Mr. Cavanaugh joined the U.K.C. in August, 1999 as VP/General Manager and has served as President since the passing of Mr. Miller in March, 2000".

**************************************

From this link....

UKC Under New Ownership

I know I mentioned a couple of times about an AKC rep encouraging breeders to make their studs available to volume breeders to improve their stock. I haven't cited it before so here's a bit from the article.

************************************

"Kodner then states that the Hunte Corp., and others like it, "are doing the breeders job." Excuse me? She says of course there is profit involved but that there is nothing wrong with making money in a legitimate fashion. Then she says it is up to "the fancy to help upgrade the quality of the breeders stock by offering its stud dogs to properly registered, healthy bitches" for a fee of course. That is comforting but for doubters, she asks readers "Wasn't the American Kennel Club founded in an effort to improve breeding stock? Or is this once again, or in the minds of some, still an elitist organization for the special few?"

I still can't believe that this ALL BREED JUDGE thinks legitimate, concerned breeders, those of us who do our certifications, DNAs, CERFS, OFAs, vWDs, skin punches, you name it, should then make stud dogs available to puppy mills, er "High Volume Breeders" to upgrade their quality. Words fail me!"

***********************************

From this link...

AKC's SECRET ALLIANCE WITH PUPPY MILLS, HUNTE CORP., "HIGH VOLUME BREEDERS", SUPPORT PUPPY MILLS, by Gayle Roberson & Scott McNeal

*WARNING* Another ignorant person posting. :p
I just read the entire thread and my head hurts. Usually, I read articles that are posted on the web with a grain of salt because you never know what the author's intentions really were. I do like how most of you link back to the AKC or give background as to who made what article so it really validates your points.

I think the biggest problem that plagues any efforts is heartlessness. If money comes before anything else, or people who think "they're just dogs, get over it" then it really hinders our efforts to educate and make a change. We're seen as looney and like we care to much about everything. I know I've been accused of that. sigh...

I do think it's very sad more haven't contributed to the discussion but feel guilty too as I've not been as involved as I could have been, on this and other AR threads. I think bc I did hold the attitude that - Yeah, it goes on but not much I can do about it.

I do believe without significant pressure from the breed clubs things will not change at the AKC - general public awareness will not change them. Look at the puppymill subject and how many years AR has been trying making the public aware. All of their efforts and the results haven't been that great. Even the new law passed in Okla. lacks real teeth - it appeared to me just another way for the State to collect fees and taxes - enforcement will be a joke.

The idea of a "premier" pure breed registry is the way for exhibitors to go.....dump the AKC!

Hey Woogie...in your reading did you happen to find the reason Cavanuagh left AKC in the first place? It would be nice to think it was because his ethics were of a higher caliber.

Thanks for reading and I hope it was worth the headache :p. I've tried to post those things that really caught my eye, but there is more if you read from the links or do your own search.

I don't think this is a fringe issue. Anyone that owns an AKC dog should see that they have an interest in this. I don't see how anyone could read through this and not consider re-thinking their opinion on the AKC. 'Ignore-ance', maybe?

The thing about this issue is that everyone that has an AKC dog or will be getting one can do something about this. Any AKC dog is registerable with UKC. Breeders can cross-register with UKC and can register their litters there. If someone was adamant about registering AKC, pups from those litters would be AKC registerable.

It would be nice to see a few breed clubs desert AKC. If a breed club abandoned AKC, it would be quickly known that the top dogs of that breed were no longer showing in AKC events. The prizes awarded would then have as much legitimacy as any AKC ch. designation. It would only take one to get the ball rolling.

I haven't found anything about Cavanaugh that explains his reasons for leaving AKC. I did come across a short bio on him....interesting guy. Here's the link if you want to read it.

Dogged devotion: UKC owner has spent decades advocating for canines | - MLive.com

AKC's PRIME software
 

AKC has developed software to aid pet store employees in selling and managing their inventory (dogs). This is something that AKC will not comment on.

Here's the link to view the manual.

http://www.terrierman.com/prime-AKC-manual.pdf

He has some great information on his website. I don't like to look at some of the pictures but some good info. I ran across him a number of years ago.

Thanks for the link, that was an interesting bio on Cavanaugh.

I loved this quote from the article:

“I always try to have fun and get (the employees) charged about the mission,” Cavanaugh said.

The mission is that of making sure a dog never ends up in the pound because of an unformed buyer, helping breeders understand their responsibility and creating the “total dog,” one that is healthy, happy and well-suited to its owners.


AKC's mission statement is interesting in that there is not much mention of "responsible breeding". And, what is maddeningly laughable, after you have read about the 7 litters and the bogus sire, is their mention of "registry integrity"........Ha....:mad:

AKC Mission Statement

The American Kennel Club is dedicated to upholding the integrity of its Registry, promoting the sport of purebred dogs and breeding for type and function. Founded in 1884, the AKC® and its affiliated organizations advocate for the purebred dog as a family companion, advance canine health and well-being, work to protect the rights of all dog owners and promote responsible dog ownership.

AKC’s Objective:

* Advance the study, breeding, exhibiting, running and maintenance of purebred dogs.

AKC's Core Values:

* We love purebred dogs
* We are committed to advancing the sport of the purebred dog
* We are dedicated to maintaining the integrity of our Registry
* We protect the health and well-being of all dogs
* We cherish dogs as companions
* We are committed to the interests of dog owners
* We uphold high standards for the administration and operation of the AKC
* We recognize the critical importance of our clubs and volunteers

Jenn, you HAVE been reading this thread, haven't you? :) Your last post presents a stark contrast between the two registries. I said earlier that as long as UKC wasn't cozy with millers that it would be good enough for me. It turns out they stand out above AKC in other ways, too. Thanks for putting the mission statements up together.

This goes a little off topic, but I'd like to throw it out there. In my searches, I've come across a few sites that are against the AKC for ruining breeds. The basic argument is that once a breed is recognized by AKC and gets into their conformation events that some of the original characteristics of the dog are being lost in a pursuit of looks over function. I've seen several examples, mostly of the hunting and working breeds. Some of these breeds have been replaced due to their having lost the abilities they were once noted for.

Although not considered a working breed, the Coton de Tulear clubs actually have a petition seeking for the breed to NOT be recognized by the AKC as one of the 5 Coton clubs is seeking recognition. Here's a little info on it.

**********************************

" There are five National Coton Clubs in the U.S. They are all unique and provide a needed balance for dealing with issues concerning the breed. Many Coton owners belong to several of the clubs. One club has announced its decision to pursue AKC recognition. The major advantages proposed for AKC recognition is that the show venues are more convenient. The major disadvantages that have emerged from a focus group is that an AKC parent club loses much control. The registry is lost to AKC and lumped together with the pedigrees of the large volume breeders which AKC solicits at the puppy auctions. There seems to be a widespread decline in the health of breeds which become recognized by the AKC. Many Coton lovers do not want to support and promote an organization which actively supports and legitimizes puppymills and pet shop puppies from which much of their revenue is said to derive. We present a petition to the Coton Community to register a protest against these practices."

**********************************

From this link...

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/429/p...ion-for-cotons