Subject: Fall Delegate Meeting Update - URGENT and DISTURBING developments
Importance: High
This will be somewhat short as it is late and I will write a more complete report tomorrow. I am just back from the fall Delegate meeting. It began with the normal committee elections and a vote on the first proposed amendment. That was an amendment limiting outside activities by delegates. AKC said it was to assist us if we had to remove a delegate for conflict of interest but it was really setting a stage of sorts. The existing restrictions were enlarged to keep people out of the delegate body who didn't support "AKC objects". Dennis Sprung and Board members explained that we could then keep "animal rights" people from "taking over the AKC".

After lunch came the regular reports from the Treasurer, the new archive program, etc. Buried in the Treasurer's report was a very quick mention of a "new contractual relationship" between AKC and the Petland chain of stores (120 in the US, with 20 more planned for 2007). The difference between Petland and PetSmart or PetCo is that they sell puppies at Petland.

During the final portion of the meeting, several delegates--who were completely caught off guard by thie news of the contract--brought up their concern and asked for more information. We were told that "we would never see the contract (which I heard from another delegate was just signed last Friday)", it is necessary for AKC to meet the bottom line, and that it was the wave of the future and we should get on board. At one point David Merriim, the attorney for AKC actually said he had not seen the contract (great boos and laughter ensued) and that if we don't work with Petland to get more dogs registered we will be looking at $75 entry fees and become an "elitist organization" . NOTE: you will be able to read the full details in a couple of days on the AKC website so excuse me if my quotes are not completely accurate. They may not be 100% correct but very, very close.

From what we could gather from the very sketchy info parsed out by the AKC staff to the delegates, the Board of Directors and the "Management Team" have signed a contract with Petland endorsing the sale of puppies under the AKC banner, with the Petland sales people encouraging people to register the puppies with AKC. Needless to say, all will be sold with no conditional breeding paperwork, as is done by breeders who sell directly to new owners.

You will see when you read the minutes on the website that the discussion went on for a couple of hours. I was in line to speak but everyone had covered my thoughts and I stepped out. Main concerns were the breeding of these puppies, the fact that we have always put AKC above "puppy mills and puppy sales at stores", the fact that these puppies will be the rescue dogs of the future, etc. A motion was made by the Golden Retriever club delegate that the delegates vote to let the board know we want them to rescend the contract. The AKC staff kept saying that it was a "non-binding, sense of the delegation vote". It carried nearly unanimously.

The delegate body is stunned. Of course, by the vote earlier in the day, we are not "supporting the AKC object" but I, for one, think it is critical that if members of RCKC do not agree with this sudden and secret action taken by the AKC without any notification of the general population it supposedly supports, we must make our voices heard.

I suggest letters be sent to Dennis Sprung, to every member of the Board of Directors, and every single higher-level management person. Alternative ways to obtain additiional funds (which does have an $8M reserve) we might consider release of the expensive NYC property, a pay cut by AKC staff (often done in private industry to save a business), cutting Board expenses, reviewing every expense line by line, etc.

If you so direct, and if I am elected your delegate to the AKC (a position I would like to hold in the upcoming year), I will vote against every single member of the Board of Directors on this issue alone, no matter how fabulously they may have served the fancy in the past. I will carry any message to the next meeting on this matter.

If this is not a concern, we can move on to other issues. If the anger expressed by delegates is representative of the anger of concerned breeders and members of RCKC, I urge everyone to act. The contract has been signed and none of the delegates is sure if any action can change anything but we can express our outrage and the new direction AKC has taken. It began with our new embrace and acceptance of "large volumne breeders"--some might say puppy mills--and this seems to be the final nail in the coffin to separate legitimate, concerned breeders from pet shop suppliers.




DISCLAIMER:
This communication is confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, (i) please do not read or disclose to others, (ii) please notify the sender by reply mail, and (iii) please delete this communication from your system. Failure to follow this process may be unlawful. Thank you for your cooperation.

As a working Border Collie owner, I am no fan of the AKC. But even I was surprised that they have gone this far.

The AKC wants to be the one and only name in dogs. Period. And they are continuing to prove it's not for the good of the dogs they supposedly represent, it's for the good of their own pocketbook.

The deal with Petland really doesn't change anything with the puppy itself. It's only for puppies that are already eligible for AKC registration through an AKC litter registration. The difference is is that Petland will be able to collect the registration fees for AKC and assist the customer in registering the dog right then and there. It's the same thing the breeder can do, collect fees and do an on-line registration.


Without the registration being turned in, and remember half of all dogs right now don't have them turned in, there is no way to contact the new owners. No way to educate.

 Quote:

The deal with Petland really doesn't change anything with the puppy itself. It's only for puppies that are already eligible for AKC registration through an AKC litter registration. The difference is is that Petland will be able to collect the registration fees for AKC and assist the customer in registering the dog right then and there. It's the same thing the breeder can do, collect fees and do an on-line registration.

It is a bit different, as Petland is not a breeder, just a broker. They are just making it easier to get that AKC pup from a pet store. By passing their resolution they are sending the message that it's okay to buy a pet store pup, as long as you can register it with them. And why did they pass such a resolution? Because they are having some financial troubles.

On their website they write

 Quote:

Buy your puppy from a responsible and well-respected breeder. This cannot be stressed enough. Responsible breeders are concerned with the betterment of the breed. For example, they work on breeding healthier dogs with the appropriate temperament for their breed. Your AKC breeder referral contact will direct you to a breeder who is concerned with the future of the puppy. Once you select a breeder, screen the breeder. Ask to see at least one of the parents (the dam or the sire) of your puppy. See how the dogs in your breeder's home interact with your breeder. Are they friendly and outgoing or do they shy away? The responsible breeder will be screening you, too, looking for the best home for each puppy.

Or, if you want to keep it simple, just head to your nearest Petland.

It's a case of trying to sound good while looking out for the bottom dollar. The AKC should try practicing what they preach.

One thing to realize is that the AKC delegates, who were not told about this deal until after it was a done deal, are overwhelmingly opposed to it. Also, the national breed clubs are opposed to it and some are even seriously discussing leaving the AKC and probably going over to the UKC. It should prove interesting to see if there actually is a backlash against this or if it proves to be just talk and little or no action.