I didnt like how they said that mixed breeds wouldnt compete head to head with purebreds, or that they couldnt earn as high of titles as purebreds. If they compete on the same level or better, they should get the titles they deserve regardless of breed IMO.
I agree Ailyn. I can give them not wanting mixes to go to the Nationals or whatever--fine. I assumed that's what they meant by not letting mixes get the highest titles. If that's not what they meant, then poo-poo on them. I know they're all about the purebred dog but a dog's a dog. Dogs don't know or care about their parentage. The part that bothered me most is not letting mixes and pures compete head-to-head. Not sure what they're afraid of.
I dunno if they're worried about people purposefully breeding things like Border Jacks (Jack Russell/BC crosses) to wipe the floor with agility. But I totally see your point (not theirs). GSDs run against Border Collies all the time in agility and everyone knows BCs are pretty much 'agility dogs' with how well they excel at it. Doesn't stop other people from competing against them.
It really doesn't seem to matter much at all when it comes to rally or obedience. Really, is my mutt going to be better at paying attention to me than your purebred? Maybe. . .but it has nothing to do with her breeding.
A dog is a dog is a dog is a dog. It's just that simple. Perhaps they just don't want to lose their reputation as purebred elitists?? Just a shot in the dark. . .I honestly don't understand their reasoning.
Plus, why are they only opening rally, agility and obedience? What about tracking?
Because I do not own any mongrels, they would not let me complete the survey! But they let me give them a comment.
I said that it stinks that I could not complete the survey.
I said that I think mixed-breed dogs should be able to compete in agility, obedience and rally.
I said Rally promotes good dog ownership and is good for dogs -- all dogs.
While I was on a roll, I said that they should put the Canine Good Citizen Acronym on our pedigrees too.
I think that the survey is a waste of time becuase it is only a probe to see if people with mutts might like to shell out money to the AKC. It does not really let specific breed people put forth their opinion. I think that because they are excluding this base of customers, they are not planning on introducing much that will effect us. That is an opinion. Sorry folks, I think the AKC is only thinking about moving a baby step in this direction.
I think that some of it is that people go to shows and want to see beautiful pure-bred dogs, not their less interesting, more common cousins. And while I would rather see a hinz57 then a Yorki-poo at these events, I think it is pretty silly.
In our GSD specialty, we have pushed to open the obedience and rally to other dogs, but so far, they want only GSDs at our GSD Specialty. I guess we are snobs.
The survey's a lot broader than offering competition for mixed breed dogs. There were a lot of other things they were asking about. I think all of us might want to take a look at it.
They're talking about breed specific legislation (their efforts to lobby against it) and their efforts to promote legislation that allows people to responsibly own and breed dogs. They ask how valuable that is to you and how valuable a bunch of other services they might offer would be.
Pretty good survey.
I took the survey because I have in the past owned mixed breed dogs. They both would have been excellent competitors in agility. (I don't think it was even around for the first one.. that was a while back.) I really should have commented on the importance of providing things that people can do with their dogs.
Yes, I did, but I could not even read the survey questions. I was shut out. I do not think that that is a good way to run a survey. I think the idea is that if people only own pure-bred dogs, they will not want anything to do with, or have an opinion in favor of mixed-breed dogs. At least that is how I took it.
Once results are gathered in any survey, you can always filter them the way you want to make them read pretty much any way you want: ie. "67% of owners that have pure-bred dogs only were in favor of allowing mixed-breed dogs to enter AKC performance events at AKC shows."
My stupid little comments at the end of my abbreviated survey will probably not even be read.
Ok, I lied and went through the whole survey, then did not submit it so I wouldn't screw them up. But I wanted to see what all they were asking.
I am glad I read through it, and am mystified that they are not interested in hearing from people who own only pure-bred dogs.
Someone here mentioned requiring mixed-breed dogs to be speutered if they want to compete. I think that is not fair. An un-speutered dog does not equal puppies. Mixed breeds can get the same ill-effects that pure-breds can get from spay/neuter. I think that spay/neuter should be a choice not a requirement. I think that the more involved the average dog owner is in dog events, dog legislation, dog people, they will be less likely to allow chance breedings of their animals.
Well, if my ILP dog has to be neutered/spayed, to compete in obedience or other events AKC, then I think it is fine to require spay neuter for other non-registered dogs.
Frankly, living in Arkansas I've almost become a proponent of mandatory spay/neuter laws. The situation stinks most places but it's really disgusting down here. The local humane society's been full for several months now.
I can almost understand it for a pure-bred. An unscrupulous breeder can show a title and the ILP number and say, see the AKC says the dog is a pure-bred, and sell the puppies without papers.
But one cannot really do that with a mixed breed dog.
The only danger is to make the ultimate agility dog by mixing cockers, border collies, and Jack Russels or some equally rediculous concotion and take over the sport.
My thing is that I am against spay/neuter altogether, but certainly before the age of two. However, I do not see any reason to keep a dog from competing until they reach two and are speutered. So far the only dog that we had that had cancer was a spayed female mix. Knowing that they are finding more and more cancers related to spay/neuter, I would not want to require it of any dog or bitch.
My theory is that the more people are involved with their dogs, the more responsible they will become. It it the irresponsible people that allow litter after litter of puppies, pure or not, to just happen.
I can see some people using it as a 'breed test' for some of those hybrid mutts, though. Unlikely, yes. Because, let's face it, those dogs are going for thousands of dollars without tests of any sort. . .
I agree with you, though. I am not planning on neutering my next dog until at least 2 years of age. My current mutt was spayed before I brought her home at 2 1/2 (which makes me happy). So I definately see your 'issue' with the spay/neuter thing. Unfortunately, there are too many people out there who are not responsible enough to have an intact dog. Whether they plan to breed it or not.