Before you go off and decide that I'm a traitor to our country for stating
what I've just stated, hear me out.
I'm sure that many people who may come across this page have AKC dogs, and it makes
sense. The AKC is our national club for breeding, showing, and registering dogs, and it has roots deep in our history
of dog fancy. But, with these roots, the tradition, and the glossy history the AKC has, I would expect that they have
some form of responsibility, responsibility to protect these animals that make many people's lives enriched and well, jobs
possible. Frankly, I don't think they're protecting dogs as well as they are able to, and I will tell my reasons why.
It started out innocently enough in the late 1800's, a group of a dozen men or so
dedicated to their dogs and desirous of protecting their bloodlines, keeping track of them, and later on, showing them in
competition for breed standards. Throughout the next fifty years, the AKC advanced in recording these breed standards,
determining a points system to judge breed standards, and began shows where breeders could show their dogs in competition
against other breeding programs registered throughout the United States.
It sounds not only innocuous but downright promising, doesn't it, our forefathers
devising a club to keep history alive? I have to say that while I do have a rather distaste for people with gross amounts
of money (I never was one for feelings of entitlement), I firmly believe that the highest quality of purebred dogs was, is,
and forever may be safest in their hands, our country's social elite, and this organization they formed might have even been
better had the regular public not gotten ahold of it; because when they did and the registration fees started coming in, the
AKC provided results that appear to be hypocritcal to their original desires.
I will be specific. The AKC is now giving registration papers to people that
breed dogs that:
1.) are being bred with congenital and/or hereditary health problems due to
inbreeding and/or our desire to consider a dog's appearance over their health (the English Bulldog must deliver its pups Cesarean
or risk dying during delivery because of the ridiculously-proportioned head not being able to travel through the birth canal).
If you didn't know, the AKC doesn't demand physical performance as part of it breed confirmation. This means
the dogs no longer have to be totally functional. I will show the Border Collie as one example. Irish Border Collie
breeders have raised a stink that the AKC is more concerned with the percentage of the angle at the stop of the dog's snout
than it's ability to herd. Why? Why is this more important? Did you realize that the European Kennel Club
laughs at us behind our backs?
The Bullmastiff now has more water babies than it ever did because of this also.
The dogs are indiscriminantly bred without the AKC having more rigid standards to physical health, and because of it, I've
noticed that the average age a female stops breeding has dropped to 6. I sure wish I remembered where I read that.
I mentioned the money before. I'll get to that.
Here's one more that makes me lay awake at night. A few years ago the Neapolitan
Mastiff was admitted into the AKC, which, by the way, acknowledges about 40% of the world's recognized dog breeds
(roughly 160 or so out of 400 - credit to the ASPCA for this statistic), and now this behemoth of an animal, capable of reaching
the size of 175 pounds easily, has no physical performance tests to attain before it's confirmed in the show ring. I
predict that we will see a decline in the health of this most wonderful and possibly the smartest and most devoted of all
the mastiffs in years to come. According the awesome Dr. Carl Semencic, this is a dog who has been known to whimper
while its master is away because of the bond it forms with the humans who love and surround it. Because I love them
more than most dogs, this saddens me.
2.) look nothing like their original breed standards (I suggest comparing pictures
of the Bouvier Des Flandres from 50 years ago to the present). This so-called mission statement of preserving breed
standards seems to have fallen by the wayside or they are susceptible to "interpretation". The English Bulldog looks
nothing like it's healthy ancestor of 100 years ago either. Thank God for the people breeding the Olde English Bulldoggue,
(a breed not recognized by the AKC probably out of embarrassment). While I adore English Bulldogs, I wouldn't purchase
one. I'd rescue one, mind you, and I still might, but give money to the AKC? Wait, I forgot. That's
coming.
3.) are being sold at times as young as 6 weeks. The AKC does not seem
to deter from breeders selling their pups at 6 weeks of age because I can find an ad for breeders selling them at this age
routinely. That's bullshit, and I'll tell you why. In a book from the Good Dog Dog Library series,
particularly Best Behavior (p. 89) I found that that dogs sold at 6 weeks of age are much more likely
to end up being resold, abandoned at shelters, or dumped because of behavior problems, mostly house soiling and biting.
Remember that bite inhibition is taught between littermates at the ages of roughly 10 to 14 weeks; allowing a puppy to
stay with its littermates longer is beneficial because it recieves the best teaching about bite inhibition from the best teachers
available, its mother, brothers and sisters. Since this is true,
then why does the AKC allow people to sell earlier? Why is there no suspension of ability to procure papers for people
guilty of this because it is a practice that produces socially-stunted dogs? Because they don't care as long
as the money is coming in. How much money? I'll tell you in a minute. Oh, in case I didn't mention it, why
do you think the breeder will sell a dog that early? Money? I would be willing to bet yes, as it's less money
put into the puppies if they are sold earlier.
Last year I emailed a woman who was selling English Bulldog pups on an AKC site with
this information because she had her pups listed as ready to go at 6 weeks. Boy, I sure wish I'd kept her reply.
According to her I didn't know what I was talking about and "how dare I" tell her how to do her business? She seemed
furious that I even suggested she look into the fact that her dogs might be better off with their mother and littermates for
a while longer.
4.) come from PUPPY MILLS! Jesus Christ, people, here's a quote from an
AKC chairman herself! " A puppy mill that loses AKC privileges is in
trouble. ``They can't sell dogs without registration papers,'' AKC Chairman Berndt said. ``Nobody will buy them.''"
Now, upon reading that last statement, you might have the same outlook that the Karen
of Bark Rescue, a German Shepard rescue states in this article, http://www.gsdhaven.org/articles/puppymills.html, when she says, "Most of these dogs are AKC registered. Does that make them purebred? Of course not. The AKC is a registry,
not the doggie police, and they use the honor system." when discussing puppy mills. She specifies not how she feels
but that this is the facts, and she's right.
So, the question is what should the AKC do about puppy mills? What should you
do about the AKC? How can you make a difference?
Don't buy a puppy or dog from a questionable AKC breeder, pet store, or anywhere
else. That's what.
Easy enough.
Go to a rescue. Call your shelter and put yourself on a list to be notified
if a particular breed comes in. If they are reluctant to call you, donate money or food. Visit weekly. Call
an extremely high quality breeder and ask if they have any dogs that are done studding or having litters even, and offer to
take them off their hands, spayed or neutered, of course. This dog already has papers and the owners might be relieved
that such a responsible owner has come along to give a cherished dog a good home. Chances are this dog will also already
be trained.
I had mentioned money a few times above, and I'll get to that now. First off,
I supposed that wealthy people were best to be breeding dogs. While it sounds elitist, I stand by that. Please
allow me to explain.
Most wealthy people aren't that much fun to be around, in my opinion, because they
are so out of touch with reality that I just want to punch them. The social elite that I've had the displeasure of waiting
on and bartending for are a group of spoiled irritants who have no concept that they aren't entitled to be treated better
than those around them. Notice I said most.
Then again, let's look at the Mellons and the Buhls and the Carnegies. Rich
people give more to the arts and social growth that you might want to admit, and for that, I am thankful, genuinely thankful.
They can't help that they're raised to be snobs any more than a few Yelm rednecks I have to endure at my son's baseball games
can help that they've been raised to think their sons' on-field performances directly reflect on their penis size.
By the way, not all people in Yelm are like that and I love living here. It is just a group of them in the whole, like
rich people are a group in the whole. Getting back to it, rich people have the means to breed dogs and do so very
well because they rarely settle for anything less than perfection, and for them money is no object.
They are sticklers for quality, and from what I've seen on the web pages respresenting
high-end dogs from high-end money, they are mostly notorious for demanding their "cast off" dogs, the ones not show quality,
are neutered and/or spayed immediately, and more often than not will take a dog back if things don't work out.
This is something the normal Joe doesn't do because of money. Why
does a wealthy person breed dogs? I'd have to say for the betterment of the breed and the challenge of competition.
This breeding program will most likely cover wonderful qualities that these people pride themselves on, the right knuckles
of a Bichon, the proper stop of a Great Dane, the perfect coat of a Comondor. Why does the guy down the street breed
his damned Golden Retriever every freaking summer? For the money the litter brings in. For the money.
Not because his Golden Retriever has a great history of no heart problems but most often because the litter, if the bitch
delivers 7 to 8 puppies sold at a modest $400.00, will gross almost $2,500.00 before papers and stud fee and probably end
giving them over a thousand after vet fees and registration. That's a nice little profit, isn't it? Who cares
if the dog isn't the best quality? It's money.
And this is why I get upset at the AKC. Their mission is to produce dogs as
close to breed standard as possible and record the lineages. So, just who is judging these over-bred backyard-quality
dogs? No one.
No, they AKC is not the doggie police as our very intuitive Karen stated above,
but they are the end of the line where the papers are finalized. So, who's responsible? The AKC.
So, just how much money are we talking about? I did a little looking into that
and would like to give credit to PETA, the Central Illinois German Shepherd Dog Rescue, and Karl Stark of the Philadelphia
Inquirer for the following numbers and facts.
The main headquarters of the AKC is on Madison Avenue in New York City, one of the
nicest and most expensive places to frequent of all the Big Apple. Its office costs $971,000.00 to rent.
That's alot of doggie papers. The president's income in 1993 was $177,000.00 according to tax documents, yet how much
money is spent investigating people who violate AKC bylaws? I can't find a single statistic. Maybe later I will
be able to, but in the meantime, no one wants to discuss that.
Clearly this "organization" (but I'd like to call it a business), still run by 12
people, brings in some serious cash. It must to keep such an expensive main office and pay almost $200,000.00 to
its president. The vice president of the United States makes a little over $180,000.00 a year, by the way. Just
sayin'. Would you think the AKC would investigate more, this attempting to buy papers, if it meant receiving
as much as a 40% cut in revenue? I don't think so. As it stands now, the AKC discourages neutering and spaying
of purebred dogs because they could be rebred.
I'll even go so far as to give the example that the Westminster Dog Show, the biggest
show every year for the AKC, often shows Iams commercials during breaks. Iams? So, this organization cares about
dogs more than money? Allow me to remind you that Iams has been under fire for years for the absolutely deplorable
conditions that its lab beagles and kittens endure. Inhumane conditions. Beatings videotaped by undercover
investigators, lack of veterinary care even though there are veterinarians employed at the labs, which, incidentally, will
shut down routinely as soon as they are exposed. How caring can the AKC be if they will allow documented animal abusers
to sponsor their events? (I suggest you go to Google and type Iams cruelty into the search engine and remember the only link
I found questioning this was from an interview with a Proctor and Gamble representative, the owner of Iams).
For a link on what I consider to be an excellent article that shows just how fucked
up the AKC is, for any of you out there with your chests puffed out in indignation even after all that I've said, do yourself
the favor of a lifetime and read this article from Karl Stark http://www.bogartsdaddy.com/bouvier/Bouv_Pages/article-inquire-puppymills-AKC.htm and then remember he wasn't sued for slander. This is an article that I may publish on this site if Mr. Stark
will allow it because it so proves my point. The AKC is a questionable organization seemingly (by their lack of
action) more concerned with money than the actual control of papering legimately-bred and quality dogs for the purpose
of improving whatever breed is being bred.
So, there you have it.
I'm not saying that people who buy AKC dogs are bad people. I am saying that
you should ask yourself; why it's so important to have a papered dog? Why? Is it that important? Could
it be because we've never thought about it? You know, I have a friend named Rob who adores Dauschunds. They are
his and his family's dog of choice, and I will bet their dogs are AKC bred. Does this mean that Rob is a snootypants?
Hell no. In fact, it's the opposite. He knows what he likes; and from what I know of his character, I would
think they paid for a dog that has been quality-bred. He and his family adore these dogs and keep them to the end of
their days. In effect, Rob and his family are the ideal dog owners. Now, if Rob were to purchase a dog and find
out its papering was counterfeit, I bet he would be angry. But, would he give the dog back? I don't think so.
Had he already bonded with the dog by the time he discovered this deception, I bet he would keep it, and that's why I
like him so much.
Yet, I have seen and heard about people who only see the worth of the paper, not
the animal it represents. People, these are living things who are at our mercy. They will love us to the end of
time were it permitted. To judge an family pet animal on the concept of whether or not it's purebred is cold.
It's conditional love. My Gator is an American Bulldog whose parents were unpapered American Bulldogs. When I
get a really good look at him sleeping or hanging out like in this photo, I am convinced that he's not a purebred
