Skip to main content

The New York Times has an article up which sums up the depravity of puppy mill operators and their greedy organizational protector, the American Kennel Club.  The abuses detailed in this article and the AKC's complicity in the abuse is evident.  The AKC works against puppy mill legislation, with sick and demented results.  America's tolerance of institutions like the AKC exemplifies our demented collective mentality.  

This blockquote pretty much sums up the activities of the AKC.  Kudos to the NY Times for putting together this evidence of the AKC's active complicity to animal torture.  I honestly never knew they were this sick.... now I know.

The A.K.C. inspected the kennel of Joseph and Cynthia Williams in Wilson, N.C., months before the police raided it. On May 17, 2012, an A.K.C. inspector said that the 34 Great Danes and mastiffs under the Williamses’ care were in “acceptable” conditions, with only 2 of the 15 categories marked “needs improvement,” for the construction of kennels and signs of “untreated, visible wounds.” The A.K.C. inspector found that the Williams kennel over all was “in compliance with A.K.C.’s Care Conditions Policy” even though the dogs did not have access to daily exercise outside their cages and pens, according to court documents.

Three months later, Wilson County officials seized 28 of the Williamses’ dogs, a majority of them in “poor” condition, suffering from illnesses, injuries and living in “unhealthy conditions,” according to court documents. A veterinarian told the court that the rescued dogs had ailments that ranged “from serious to severe” and that “most of the injuries appeared to be chronic, having been in existence for a substantial period of time.”

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Agree--I won't have anything to do with AKC (7+ / 0-)

    or their fucking dog shows.

    America works best when it works for everyone.

    by Azdak on Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 10:29:01 AM PST

  •  Never did care about AKC (11+ / 0-)

    because I don't care about having a pure-bred dog.

    And dog shows are such a bore.

    But never knew they were protecting puppy mills. That is a new low.

    I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but please get yourself a rescue dog whenever you want a new dog!

    I have 2 and they are the 2 best dogs in the whole wide world.

    WE NEVER FORGET Our Labor Martyrs: a project to honor the men, women and children who lost their lives in Freedom's Cause. For Jan: Right-to-Work/Right-to-Live(?)

    by JayRaye on Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 10:39:47 AM PST

    •  Rescue dogs can be great... or a real problem, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      especially for an inexperienced dog owner.  As a dog trainer, I have to agree with Miss Blue -- rescues can have socialization problems as well as the dog equivalent of PTSD.  Experienced owners may be willing to take on such challenges.  But for those who can't assess the possible problems in a dog they're thinking of adopting, or who don't have the know-how to deal with such problems, the results are sometimes heartbreaking.  For first-time owners, I usually recommend getting a dog from a responsible breeder that they have researched thoroughly -- AFTER they've researched the breed and know it's a good match for their lifestyle.

      Pe'Sla isn't safe until the loan is paid off. The Rosebud Sioux Tribe could use some help with that.

      by Kay Observer2 on Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 03:07:44 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  there is some truth here. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jabney, Kay Observer2

        My Rusty had been abandoned and left to starve in the back yard. He had a lot of problems. Also he was untrainable, and I have been training dogs for years.

        I got help from a professional trainer. Put him thru beginner, intermediate, and advanced.

        Food problems, aggressiveness around food with my other dog. I hand fed him for about a month sitting next to my other dog. He's fine now.

        Better than fine. He's a great dog. Loves people. Loves to play. Happy all the time.

        It was all worth it.

        WE NEVER FORGET Our Labor Martyrs: a project to honor the men, women and children who lost their lives in Freedom's Cause. For Jan: Right-to-Work/Right-to-Live(?)

        by JayRaye on Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 03:36:24 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Sigh (5+ / 0-)

    There are literally thousands of responsible, credible dog breeders in this country.  They are not the problem.

    I raised horses, not dogs.  But the excessive, unwanted numbers of animals are a severe problem there, as well.  As unpopular as it might be to you, in my 40+ years in the equine industry, I counseled every customer to buy ONLY a registered horse.

    Rescues have their place and it's admirable that many are willing to go that route.  However, rescues can also have their own issues which would be disastrous for anyone getting their first horse.  

    I feel rather the same way about dogs.  The blame for the excess numbers lies primarily with irresponsible pet owners, allowing dogs to roam unneutered/spade and reproducing at will.  Likewise cats.

    While puppy mills have been addressed by legislation, which should go further with stricter punishments, etc, I would much rather see efforts put forth to punish pet owners for the constant "oops" pregnancies.  

    Your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore. John Prine -8.00,-5.79

    by Miss Blue on Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 11:14:39 AM PST

    •  I agree with you to a point; (5+ / 0-)

      not all pets need to be pure breds but it certainly helps to know their history i.e. their parentage and their circumstances.

      I find it ironic that the article on which this diary is based looks to the ASPCA for guidance/comments.

      I find the ASPCA loathsome, for their ads which pull on the heartstrings in order to get money from saps like us.

      As detailed in this article from CBS News:

      The AKC is a registrant of purebred animals;it is not an enforcement agency.

      Further, puppy mill breeders tend to sell puppies as "registerable", meaning they don't have papers.

      Don't buy from puppy mills. Spay and neuter your pets.

      •  bullshit (0+ / 0-)

        the aspca is loathsome but you have no comment about the despicable AKC.  sounds like you've got a dog in the game, pun intended.  

        you know damn well that the AKC is complicit to rampant torture and abuse of animals.

        shame on you.

        Stop Prohibition, Start Harm Reduction

        by gnostradamus on Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 04:46:49 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Sounds like we need to agree on a lexicon before (0+ / 0-)

          starting a sane, respectful conversation. Hyperbole like, ' complicit to rampant torture and abuse of animals.', 'loathsome' and 'despicable' is not generally helpful towards that end.

          No one approach is always right and not many things are irretrievably wrong, so trying to paint with such a broad brush in order to whitewash any shortcomings in the argument is a common tactic.

          I believe in considering the source and doing independent research, as do many Kossacks, so understand many of us are not likely to take your obviously biased word at face value.

          Information is abundant, wisdom is scarce. ~The Druid.
          ~Ideals aren't goals, they're navigation aids.~

          by FarWestGirl on Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 05:49:41 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  uh what? (0+ / 0-)

            they lobby against legislation banning chaining up dogs, stacking dogs in cages where shit falls on the ones underneath.

            torture.  not hyperbole.

            wake the fuck up.

            Stop Prohibition, Start Harm Reduction

            by gnostradamus on Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 07:51:35 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  lol As I said, 'No one approach is always right'. (0+ / 0-)

              And 'wake the fuck up.', in the context of my comment can hardly be described as anything other than hysterical and deliberately provocative.

              Do you claim that the ASPCA and other animal rights organizations do no wrong? That everything they do, and all the people who act in their names, are above board and honest? That anything they do is okay since they claim that they mean well?

              They also solicit money that is not used as they claim it will be, their finances are opaque and they use some very ethically shady tactics, (blatant lying and some fairly extreme exaggeration, among them), to elicit funds from the well meaning unwary.

              But given the tone of your diary and response to my calm reply, I very much doubt that you are capable of a useful conversation. Good night

              Information is abundant, wisdom is scarce. ~The Druid.
              ~Ideals aren't goals, they're navigation aids.~

              by FarWestGirl on Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 08:07:31 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  more BS (0+ / 0-)

                you cite money problems with the aspca but say nothing of the AKC's lobbying against dogs being in cages or tied to a tree all day every day.


                did i stutter?

                Stop Prohibition, Start Harm Reduction

                by gnostradamus on Tue Feb 12, 2013 at 05:05:49 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  lol If you ever find yourself capable of an adult (0+ / 0-)

                  conversation, I'd be happy to have one. Until then...

                  Information is abundant, wisdom is scarce. ~The Druid.
                  ~Ideals aren't goals, they're navigation aids.~

                  by FarWestGirl on Tue Feb 12, 2013 at 03:25:06 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  i get angry at obfuscation (0+ / 0-)

                    I shouldn't.  I lose the argument when I do that.  But it's bullshit when people do that and you know it.  You talk about stuff, i.e. me, other than the issue at hand:  the dogs shitting down on each other in cages at the puppy mills, the torture a dog suffers when they stay caged or tethered all day.  And the AKC lobbies against laws that try to address those red necks' evil, pathetic behavior.  And you know it but you try to deflect from those facts.

                    Stop Prohibition, Start Harm Reduction

                    by gnostradamus on Tue Feb 12, 2013 at 06:10:42 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  So do I. I don't defend puppy mills, I believe (0+ / 0-)

                      that irresponsible breeders should be closed down. I do disagree with your apparent definition of torture and how it lacks perspective.

                      What I know is that 'throwing the baby out with the bath water', as they used to say, is counterproductive. Tossing all breeders into the same bin as the irresponsible ones is a bad idea on many levels.

                        The AKC has some very poor policies and many dog breeders have done rotten things in pursuit of the free market and profits. But: the AKC has also been the only check on many things that irresponsible breeders do and if they weren't in place, things would be much worse. I don't like the AKC, I don't like many of the nasty, backbiting assholes who show dogs, (or horses), or the way they ruin good breeds with their damned fads in pursuit of a buck.  But working in an imperfect world, we do what we can with what we've got. We're not going to eliminate all the idiots everywhere and painting them all one color, evil, is not going to get everyone on your side to take action. It's like the GOP going after everyone who needs public assistance for the bad behavior of a few who do scam the system.

                      Pressuring the AKC is useful, screaming terrible words at the top of one's lungs at the drop of a hat is not only not useful, it is counterproductive. Once people realize you are not going to take a reasonable look at individual situations and are instead going to lump all sorts of things together and try to get them to help you sweep the whole mess, good, bad and indifferent, out, they're going to tune you out. I guess what I'm saying mostly is that the world is not as black and white as it seems you want it to be, It would be really nice if people who did bad things would just stay cardboard cutouts that we can shit on and vilify and feel good about doing it, but that's not the real world.

                      I'm not trying to deflect from the bad things that puppy mills do, I'm trying to get you to see that even the people who claim to be the good guys have got feet of clay and need to be held accountable for their actions, too. Just because the ASPCA does some good work, it doesn't mean they should have a get-out-of-jail-free card for the sneaky, dishonest things that they pull. Any more than the AKC should have carte blanche to do whatever they want because they do occasional good things, too.


                      Information is abundant, wisdom is scarce. ~The Druid.
                      ~Ideals aren't goals, they're navigation aids.~

                      by FarWestGirl on Tue Feb 12, 2013 at 08:48:45 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

        •  you are mistaken. badly mistaken. nt (0+ / 0-)

          EdriesShop Is it kind? is it true? is it necessary?

          by edrie on Tue Feb 12, 2013 at 12:30:01 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  oh, you mean the aspca that refused to treat (0+ / 0-)

        one of my rescued dogs because i didn't have cash in my hand or a credit card to give them?  i offered the nasty "manager" over ten grand worth of rubies, emeralds and more (i had just made a major purchase at the gift center and was cash poor at that exact moment my dog was in severe crisis.

        his answer was for me to go give the dog to their "adoption" facility - turn him over - and they would pay to treat him.  i raced over there to do it to keep him alive, however, by the time i ran back to the truck, he had died from what we later found out was a heart tumor.  totally unexpected for a 1 1/2 yr old apparently healthy dog!

        when i tried to go speak to the head of the aspca the same day, the manager came in and told me to get out - threatened to call the police if i didn't leave the premises.

        that didn't work. i sat quietly and asked to speak to the head.  his secretary came down, i related (quietly and professionally) what had transpired and told her that i would never donate to the aspca again (as i had many times before) because when MY dog needed help in an emergency, we were turned away.

        about two months later, the sf group had their big fundraiser called the "bark and wine" dinner... it happened to be in the giftcenter where i worked as a wholesale rep.  i waited.  when i found someone who was an officer of the aspca, (yes, i crashed their party), i told her what had happened.  she said "wait here!" and found the head and brought him over for me to share the story again.  his response was that it would never happen again.  why not?  because, they fired the manager - right after this happened.  am i sure i am the reason? no.  but i like to think that my persistance helped.  (along with the head of the s.f. animal control head who was absolutely livid about what happened and was friends with the head of the aspca - and who called him in my presence to let him know how gucci poochie and i had been turned away.

        i've rescued over 65 dogs (almost another one today until he finally ran back under his own fenced yard), i've had many rescues - both mixed and purebreed.  that ANY smug idiot tries to tell me what i can and can not have has a real problem.  if this keeps up, then perhaps a bit closer look into the rescue organizations that demand payment for adoption (against their 501c status).  there is such a maniacal effort by some rescues to get "dogs" these days that they go outside states and across the country to pick up dogs that are then misrepresented as being the breed that particular rescue is supposed to be saving.

        dogs - money - yep - and, when i say the breeders aren't the ones making it, then who is?

        just sayin...

        EdriesShop Is it kind? is it true? is it necessary?

        by edrie on Tue Feb 12, 2013 at 12:28:51 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  you're right (0+ / 0-)

          the AKC does no wrong when they lobby against chaining up dogs all day every day, i.e. torture.  or how they lobby against dogs kept in cages like farm pigs, i.e. torture.

          look over there!  aspca!

          Stop Prohibition, Start Harm Reduction

          by gnostradamus on Tue Feb 12, 2013 at 05:08:23 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Misleading title. AKC does some good work (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Puppy mills are bad for AKC,  for the dogs, for dog owners etc. and they will work to improve the situation.

    AKC is a limited operation with the aim of preserving breed lines. This can be important for preserving the characteristics of dogs esp. those which have been bred to do certain jobs. I know AKC members and breeders who are amazingly generous with their time and money when it comes to dog rescue, and not just of purebred dogs.

    AKC does wonderful things to promote the love of animals and responsible ownership. I'm going to LOVE watching their Westminster Dog Show tonight and tomorrow, and going to their big expo "Meet the Breeds" in NYC in October.

    Do read their mission statement:

    On the Internet nobody knows I am a dog (or whether I am a mutt or a pure breed, either!)

    Full disclosure: I am a dog lover and I appreciate pure breeds and shelter dogs, junk yard dogs, and especially service dogs.

    •  BS (0+ / 0-)

      the AKC lobbies against dogs being chained up all day or in cages all day like a farm pig.  nice try with lipstick on this pig.

      i don't see how people can overlook that or the AKCs lobbying against puppy mills citing the cute little dog shows.

      Stop Prohibition, Start Harm Reduction

      by gnostradamus on Tue Feb 12, 2013 at 05:10:56 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  oh. (0+ / 0-)

    you mean the nyt article that left out a whole bunch of important information like how the AKC has investigators to STOP puppy mills and the majority of the ones busted are done so BECAUSE the AKC reported them?

    or the NYT article that stated that "40%" of the funding for the AKC comes from registrations, when it is really below 10%?

    or the article that left out the programs for medical research to ensure better health in dogs, that prohibit damaging inbreeding, etc?

    ya, right.

    oh, and did you know that the HSUS and many rescue groups want ALL private breeders prohibited from doing so?  and those same "activists" ONLY want shelter dogs (that have been spayed and neutered) to be available as pets!

    as someone who DID breed a specific type of dog because of that dog breed's amazing qualities and chose not to continue because i wasn't planning to actively work to increase the bloodlines (EVEN though ari's pups had 52 champions going back to one of the original foundation only five generations back).... i chose not to breed.

    however, the breeders i DO know are responsible, careful in placement of pups, they take pups BACK when the match doesn't work, they take pups BACK when the owner dies!

    the breeder/friend who will eventually have my next samoyed for me will be on the papers as a co-owner (through the akc) so that should i die before the pup does, i know EXACTLT where that pup will go.

    that times article is inaccurate, misleading and misrepresents one of the oldest organizations that houses information on genetic issues in breeds, works to prevent them, educates people on breed behavior to PREVENT unsuitable choices (which, btw, end up with the poor dog paying the price by being dumped either on the street or in a shelter).

    and if any of you think that dog breeding by the small breeder is "profitable" - it is not.  to breed a bitch, it starts with the health care a minimum of six months prior to breeding - checkups prior and after, vacinations and vets on call to insure any problem is immediately addressed... but that's not the half of it.

    RESPONSIBLE breeders dont move pups out until they have had all of the necessary shots - and that is long after they can climb out of the whelping box to eat half the books, shoes, chair legs, favorite stuff that they can sink their baby teeth into.

    my dog's pups - all eight of them - ate $1500 worth of shoes, boots, etc., and that doesn't count books, beds, etc.  that was in 1973.  

    the key here is "responsible".  now if you want to see ALL breeders shut down by mandatory spay/neutor - then are you advocating that no one should have the right to share their lives with dogs?  cats?

    if so, then i don't wish to discuss ANYTHING with you - ever again.

    next time, how about getting your facts straight before spewing the "peta" line.

    i'm looking for the link from this letter from the AKC - until i find it (it was on a facebook page of a respected breeder i know)
    i'll publish it for content.

    From the AKC:

    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.

    Alan Kalter
    Chairman of the Board
    American Kennel Club

    in the letter from the akc, the williams case is referenced, as are several others.  

    please!  if you are going to do a "story" - do some research to find out the other point of view.  and learn something about the akc and what it does before going off on a tangent because of one article.  hit pieces are hit pieces without some balance.


    EdriesShop Is it kind? is it true? is it necessary?

    by edrie on Tue Feb 12, 2013 at 12:17:47 AM PST

    •  ha ha ha (0+ / 0-)
      in fact, over 99% of the 55,000 that the AKC has inspected since 2000, have been found to be in compliance.
      i think the NYT's basic reporting shows that comment to be a fricking joke.  

      and there's NOTHING you can say that will whitewash their lobbying against puppy mills, lobbying against laws banning dogs being tortured (chained up all day, in stacked cages all day shitting on each other, etc).

      you've got NOTHING you can say about that.  NOTHING.

      Stop Prohibition, Start Harm Reduction

      by gnostradamus on Tue Feb 12, 2013 at 05:14:21 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  why are you attacking the american kennel club? (0+ / 0-)

        EdriesShop Is it kind? is it true? is it necessary?

        by edrie on Tue Feb 12, 2013 at 11:56:39 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  because they are complicit with animal torture (0+ / 0-)

          I've only said that like 10 times to you.  Why have you tried to ignore the fact that the AKC has lobbied against tethering and caging laws, i.e. anti-torture laws?  

          Do you think chaining up dogs all day is ok?  Are you ok with dogs in cages shitting down on those caged below?  No both of those are torture.  And you know it.

          They lobby against puppy mill laws.... You can try as hard as you can to ignore that fact, because you have your ulterior motives, but the facts remain.  The AKC does it for money and it's despicable.  And you know it.

          How can you even ask that question?  Whatever.  

          Stop Prohibition, Start Harm Reduction

          by gnostradamus on Tue Feb 12, 2013 at 06:06:19 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  bullfuckinghorseshit. you don't have one bit (0+ / 0-)

            of factual basis for your spurious claims.  you make absurd accusations without proof (and don't link to the peta-fools lies and distortions - peta is the james o'keefe of the animal world).

            now, i'm done here until you can address an issue without wild eyed exclamations such as you have made here.

            EdriesShop Is it kind? is it true? is it necessary?

            by edrie on Tue Feb 12, 2013 at 06:51:46 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site