Pet Shop Puppies

[glencorgi]

Originally Posted by Michael Romanos

Look, it doesn't matter if puppy mill breeders are members of anything or not: the AKC is similar to the New Zealand KC - part of it is a political institution and a lobby organisation for the advancement of the treatment of dogs. So its to them that concerned people should be looking for leadership and for accepting the challenge to take matters such as puppy mill farms to the limit that one can go. One also needs to ask here, what are breed clubs and national breed organisations doing. A lot of people know which breeds of dogs that these scumbag breeders concentrate on. The system is falling down around the proverbial ankles because I would hazard a guest, no local or national breed club is taking up the mantle to force the AKC to take the kind of political measures that might put a halt to these puppy mill breeders.

Michael, you were the one who suggested the breeder was likely a member of "recognized" kennel clubs which would lend him an allure of "respect." AKC and politics is relatively recent phenomenon. They did rally the fancy to help defeat two versions of what were called the Puppy Protection Act. Their legislative department consisted of one person. In the past couple of years it has increased staff to about three people and there has been a recent change in who is heading it. They do have a lobbyist, which has done the purebred community no favors. The Cat Fancy is far ahead of the AKC in addressing legislative matter, plus they actually have attorneys versed in animal law heading their department. The UKC (United Kennel Club) is also leaps and bounds ahead of AKC in these matters and they too have an attorney among those who deal with legislative matters. When approached for the commercial breeding industry's business, UKC turned them down. After the FUS/DNA program was instituted and there was such a huge loss of the commercial breeding industry registration revenue by AKC what AKC did was to implement a High Volume Breeders Committee to work with the commercial industry and try to woo them back. Among the things suggested to the fancy was the use of their champion stock to the commercial breeding industry to help improve the quality of the dogs sold in pet shops. For example, what AKC was promoting was for someone like Lesley Chalmers to let the commercial kennels (puppy mills) use Taylor's sire at stud to several of their corgi bitches. An AKC judge wrote an article for one of the dog fancy publications promoting this idea.

It's all very well for Debbie to get on a high horse about Government. But it is a legislative commitment that bans any more than 20 dogs, say, on a property or properties of the same person/people, that would greatly help prevent the absolute worse aspects of puppy mill breeders.

Debbie is not on a high horse about government, nor has Debbie even gotten on a soapbox - yet. IF she is on a high horse about anything it is because of the cries for "there ought to be a law" when there are already laws on the books that would cover any situation of abuse, neglect, and/or cruelty that might come up, IF they were enforced. We don't need anymore laws. The United States Department of Agriculture was the entity which suggested puppies as cash crops to farmers when they were having a hard year with other crops. From a 2002 Hunte Corporation (the corporation which supplies the Petland pet shops across the nation and is the largest broker of puppies in the world <[url]http://www.thehunte corporation.com> ) press release:
"USDA Approves Loan to McDonald County K-9 Distributor Blunt Announces Goodman, Missouri -- The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has approved a $900,000 guaranteed rural development loan to allow the Hunte Corporation, located in northern McDonald County, to purchase equipment, restructure its debt and provide working capital for expansion Southwest Missouri Congressman Roy Blunt has announced. Hunte Corporation Chairman Andrew Hunte said, "The loan will allow us to expand business and increase employment in McDonald County." The company received another loan for $3.5 million from the USDA last year."

Translation - the United States government is subsidizing the commercial breeding industry, which is the reason I say government is responsible for much of what we see in the care and conditions of dogs in high volume breeding kennels.

The NZKC also lets us down on occasions and I also wonder why this guy with the Wheaten Terriers is allowed to operate -

It could be that he is operating legally and within the standards and parameters of the NZKC as well as local health and animal welfare statutes.

BUt the AKC is only as good and is only doing its job to the level the members (clubs) allow it. If the clubs are slack, the AKC will be slack. It's the bottom up syndrum.

That is not how AKC works. Decisions are made at the top and then the Board of Directors and the President tell the member clubs' delegates this is how it is going to be. The AKC is a corporation and their main interest is the bottom line one reason AKC brand leashes can now be found in Target department stores. Two recent examples of this. AKC decided they wanted to start online classified advertising much like the sponsors of this site puppyfind.com. The parent clubs and the fancy saw red over the idea - all that was required was that the litter was registered with AKC for it to be eligible for listing in the classifieds. No consideration of parent clubs' codes of ethics or any other responsible breeding practices. No educational information about a breed. One had to have a litter registered in order to be listed, so there was no opportunity for responsible breeders to take out ads in order to try to educate the public. In this case there was a token of a compromise in that when one clicks on a breed at least now there is a link to the parent club before one gets to the puppies for sale section.

The more recent example happened coming up a year ago. A week before the scheduled Board meeting and Delegates meeting AKC allied with the largest animal rights group in the world, the HSUS and the Doris Day Animal League (DDAL) in support of PA Senator Rick Santorum's Pet Animal Welfare Statute (PAWS) amendment to the Animal Welfare Act (AWA). When brought to the Board the vote was 4 in favor, 3 opposed. When presented to the Delegates, who represent the member clubs, AKC support of PAWS was a done deal - they had no voice or say in the matter. Not only did AKC turn its back on its constituency; it also sold out former allies. This has been one of the most divisive and controversial decisions AKC has made. Changes ARE sorely needed at AKC, unfortunately we did not see the needed ones with the last election. It is not an issue of being "let down" by AKC, rather more one of betrayal. Money, power and egos seem to be more the motivating factors at AKC now, rather than the standards and integrity of the advancement of purebred dogs - a mission statement which they have now abandoned.

AKC could join forces with the SPCA (or whatever its equivallent in USA is called) and your national vets association - though your vets might be very happy to have puppy mill breeders around - to make representations to Government/s to put a closure to these terrible puppy mill farms.

The latest alliance AKC has made should make you very happy then. And in case you are not getting the message, AKC is courting and wooing the high volume breeders while doing all it can to bring about the demise of the reputable hobby breeders of the fancy, or so it seems.

Debbie

[Jhemphill]

Here is a link to an organization the works with the Humane Society of the United States to shut down puppy mills http://www.stoppuppymills.org they have an area to tell your story that lets you tell them about puppy mills in your area. Do not know if they can help you personally but it never hurts to try.

[Michael Romanos]

From what Debbie has said the AKC is a disgrace and needs to be overhauled. If a 'club' is not controlled by its members then how can it be called a club or operate as a club.
I fully inderstand why the AKC is paying less heed to the pure breed fraturnity.
TThe NZKC is trying to become the representation body for all dogs and dog owners in NZ. Pure bred dog breeding and conformation shows are a small feature of the overall dog scene anwhere in the world. In NZ, other sports, such as agility is taking over and all these other sports are for both pure bred and mixed bred dogs. The NZKC at present represents some 11,000 dogs directly - but there are 515,000 dogs in NZ. The NZKC attempts to get involved in all issues concerning dogs - from farm to city, from microchipping to local registration fees, from unwanted dogs to dangerous dogs From the proper care for dogs to exporting and importing dogs. From docking and cropping issues to endorsing commercially produced food. iF ALL THESE KIND OF THINGS - AND MUCH MORE - ARE NOT PART OF THE CRITERIA OF THE AKC - THEN GET RID OF THE AKC AND RETURN GOVERNANCE OF THE NATIONAL DOG ASSOCIATION BACK TO THE PEOPLE

My final thoughs on this issue is: Government local and central - are there to make the best possible rules and regulations for its people - many times the wrong laws are passed and then need to be dispensed with or changed. But they need to be made in order for people and animals to be protected from the worse elements of mankind. If there is no meaningful law in place to stop a person owning dozens and hundreds of dogs, then one has to start the ball rolling. If there is no national organizaion where this fits the bill, then direct communication to the political masters ( in NZ this would be Mayors, Members of Parliament, Cabinent Ministers, the Prime Minister) . I could contact all these people in NZ - is the USA so far out of touch between its people and the law makers and the law facilitators?