interesting article from the NYT

[Dainerra]

you will find that many people here also opposed the laws like Prop B. Not because they have a financial stake in puppy mills but because the legislation would actually be harder on good breeders than it would on puppy mills.

I think that what Lies was referring to was the attitude of "AKC approved breeders" AKC doesn't approve them and AKC registration doesn't mean that the pups are quality dogs. AKC only means that there is a pedigree of ancestors. It says nothing else about the quality of the dog.
If more people understood that it is merely a birth certificate perhaps the public attitude would change a bit.

[Kelly&Kip]

Originally Posted by LifeofRiley

Be careful of who you choose to cite...

The National Animal Interest Alliance (NAIA) is a front group and industry funded lobbying organization for animal commerce and agribusiness based in Portland, Oregon. They are not the friend of most animal or dog lovers.

I simply shared a link to an article written in response to and critical of the NYT article. I did not say I endorsed the article or the authors of it. I am unfamiliar with NAIA but I thought the article raised some points valid to this discussion, and so I thought I would share. That's all.

[Liesje]

Originally Posted by LifeofRiley

If only it was that simple. Fact of the matter is that the AKC is not simply a registry, they are a powerful lobbying force that is doing more harm than good.

Then don't give them your money. I don't like what their version of the GSD has become so I am not a member of their parent club and no longer enter AKC events. It's pretty simple for me. I don't support them so I don't pay them. I support other organizations so those are the organizations I join and whose events I enter. It's not my fault people will buy a dog from a puppy mill or pet store because it is "AKC registered" and then get all surprised when they find out the conditions their dog was born into and all the health problems in their lines.

[gsdraven]

Originally Posted by LifeofRiley

They are not the friend of most animal or dog lovers.

Neither is the HSUS.

[huntergreen]

Originally Posted by Liesje

Then don't give them your money. I don't like what their version of the GSD has become so I am not a member of their parent club and no longer enter AKC events. It's pretty simple for me. I don't support them so I don't pay them. I support other organizations so those are the organizations I join and whose events I enter. It's not my fault people will buy a dog from a puppy mill or pet store because it is "AKC registered" and then get all surprised when they find out the conditions their dog was born into and all the health problems in their lines.

i agree, don't support them. i find it interesting that "akc" allows the use of there name/and registers puppies from puppy mills. since they allow it, they are endorsing said pups. what was there income last year? they can afford inspections, at least investigate complaints, yet they don't.

[Liesje]

How are they endorsing it? They're just a registry. If the DMV lets a drug dealer register their license plate or obtain a driver's license is the state endorsing crime? No...

[selzer]

The AKC does inspections, and uses the money that they have allocated for that to inspect those breeders who are most likely to have issues -- those who register a lot of litters.

A lot of your pet store puppies are coming with ACA or CKC (Continental Kennel Club) papers or other bogus registries because their breeders already ran afoul of the AKC.

The AKC does a lot for dogs. More than HSUS and PETA. Yes they do lobby against legislation that is not necessarily good for dogs. And at the same time, they have created things like the CGC test, that is pretty widely recognized, and allows all dogs, not just AKC dogs to participate. Yes they do charge a fee. Big hairy deal. It costs money to record it and ship a certificate. What little is left is sent to help lobbying or inspecting puppy mills, etc.

I support the AKC, because it is the best thing going here in the US as a registry and they also do a lot of other stuff. I think it is well worth what it costs.

[Liesje]

Agree, I support the *registry* (my dogs are AKC registered). I don't support the parent club's version of the GSD so I am not a member of the parent club and don't enter their events. I honestly don't care if AKC does inspections or not. If dogs are legally being abused or neglected then I'll leave that to the local law enforcement.

[FlyAway]

Here is the AKC's response to the article I received by email.

February 10, 2013
Dear Fellow Dog Lover,

The New York Times published an article using unsubstantiated, anecdotal episodes to paint a grossly misleading and biased picture of dog breeders who register their dogs and litters with the AKC. In addition, they relied on opinions of other animal rights organizations, without facts to back them up, in an attempt to refute the AKC's good working relationship with law enforcement, animal control officers, lawmakers and others who care about animal welfare and reporting animal cruelty.

AKC Respected As An Animal Welfare Organization

The article states, "But the A.K.C. is increasingly finding itself ostracized in the dog world, in the cross hairs of animal protection services, law enforcement agencies and lawmakers who say that the club is lax in performing inspections and that it often lobbies against basic animal rights bills because they could cut into dog registration fees."

• The truth is the vast majority of breeders are responsible; in fact, over 99% of the 55,000 that the AKC has inspected since 2000, have been found to be in compliance. When AKC does discover substandard conditions, our policies require that we immediately report them to local, state and federal officials.
• AKC has a productive, working relationship with local animal controls, state and local law enforcement, state departments of agriculture throughout the country, as well as the USDA, and works cooperatively with all of those agencies to ensure the enforcement of cruelty and neglect laws, as well as the provisions of the federal Animal Welfare Act.
• In fact, in many instances, the highly publicized raids for which animal rights groups take credit in the media have come about as a direct result of AKC's reporting to law enforcement.
• AKC is well respected by lawmakers who consider us credible experts on dog issues, and rely on our thoughtful and considered advice when it comes to legislation that will impact dogs and their breeders and owners.

Misguided Opinions Versus Facts

The article also quotes ASPCA President and CEO Ed Sayres who says "a majority of the commercial breeders in the raids that his group participated in had ties to A.K.C.-registered litters." But, there is no proof or numbers given to back up this charge. He goes on to state "The irony to the consumer is that they're paying a lot for a fake Rolex." and that he thinks "dogs are often genetically compromised and come from traumatic environments." Both of these statements are opinions that were printed erroneously as fact.

The ASPCA has a history of such tactics. Recently they reached a legal settlement with Feld Entertainment, Inc., the producer of Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus, agreeing to pay Feld $9.3 million to settle all claims related to ASPCA's part in more than a decade of manufactured litigation brought by animal rights interest groups that attempted to outlaw elephants in the company's Ringling Bros. Circus. This settlement applies only to the ASPCA. Feld Entertainment's lawsuit, including its claims for litigation abuse and racketeering (RICO), continues against the remaining defendants, the Humane Society of the United States, the Fund for Animals, Animal Welfare Institute, Born Free USA united with Animal Protection Institute, Tom Rider and the attorneys who were involved. Discovery in the initial lawsuit uncovered over $190,000 that these animal activist groups and their lawyers paid to Tom Rider who lived off of the money while serving as the "injured plaintiff" in the lawsuit against the circus.

AKC is a Leading Not-For-Profit Organization

The article also states, "As recently as 2010, roughly 40 percent of the A.K.C.'s $61 million in annual revenue came from fees related to registration. Critics say a significant part of that includes revenue from questionable breeders like the Hamiltons, or so-called puppy mills, which breed dogs en masse with little regard for basic living standards." We gave the reporter statistics that dispute this claim but they were not used. In fact, less than 5 percent of our total revenue comes from commercial breeders who register dogs and litters with us.

• The AKC, for 129 years, has been committed to responsible dog ownership and responsible breeding of dogs, and we will continue our proactive efforts to further those goals, even when those efforts impact our bottom line.
• AKC saw substandard breeders leave the registry in droves in the mid-1990's when it instituted a care and conditions policy, and more leave when we sought to insure the integrity of the registry through DNA testing.

An Incomplete Picture Portrayed

Hamilton Case: While the article inaccurately portrays Hamilton as a high volume breeder or "puppy mill," court documents make clear that this was a situation where "hoarding is likely a factor in what was occurring as the Hamilton's were clearly unable to part with dogs that they had collected over the years."

Williams Case: The article fails to mention that Mr. and Mrs. Williams were charged in July of 2012 with one count of cruelty, and that charge was subsequently dismissed in September of 2012, based on the judge's determination that the warrant that led to the illegal search of the Williams' home and seizure of their dogs and the filing of the single charge was invalid. The Williams engaged in civil litigation to retain custody of their dogs from the "rescue" organization involved in the illegal seizure.

This is similar to the more egregious case of Dan Christiansen in Montana who is suing the HSUS for $5M over a 2009 "raid" of his hunting dog kennel. A judge later ruled that the warrant for the raid was obtained based on intentionally misleading information, and all of the cruelty charges against Mr. Christiansen were dismissed.

Chilinski Case: Likewise, the story fails to acknowledge that along with the seizure of Mr. Chilinski's dogs, law enforcement seized over 200 marijuana plants that he was growing on his property, a vocation which likely led to the deterioration of his kennel and his overall ability to care for his dogs in the two years between his last AKC inspection and the raid of this property.

Voice Your Opinion
While the AKC's critics may be vocal, they are few, led by extremist national animal rights groups who see their legislative influence and massive fundraising abilities diminished by growing recognition that the focus of their efforts is not bettering the lives of dogs or enhancing our relationship with them.

Nonetheless, AKC continues to:

• Spend millions annually on a kennel inspections program
• Donate millions for the advancement of canine health research
• Continues to give millions to canine search and rescue and disaster assistance
• Continues to support the rights of responsible breeders to breed and raise dogs, and fight for the rights of responsible individuals to own them.

It is important to note that in any enforcement and regulatory program, there will be those who approach the regulated activity with a disregard for compliance with the rules. As a result, there is always a risk that those non-compliant few will reflect negatively on the vast majority who are in compliance. Nonetheless, the AKC remains committed to its inspection program and its belief that the AKC is helping breeders achieve compliance through education regarding best practices for breeding and caring for dogs.

Please share with your friends and family the facts and go to the NYT website and take the opportunity to post your comments about your commitment to responsible breeding and ownership of dogs.

Sincerely,

Alan Kalter
Chairman of the Board
American Kennel Club