Fuming over elitist, nasty reaction to AKC mixed-breed survey--what do you think?

Absolutely...this is why the primary modus operendi (sp) for AR groups is 'divide and conquer' and too often dog people play right into that.
 
We MUST be unified in our cause which should be promting RESPONSIBLE DOG OWNERSHIP, and protecting our rights to have dogs in our lives.
 
Period...full stop...end of story.

ORIGINAL: rwbeagles
We MUST be unified in our cause which should be promting RESPONSIBLE DOG OWNERSHIP, and protecting our rights to have dogs in our lives.

Period...full stop...end of story.

So does that mean that owning a mutt from a shelter means I'm not a responsible dog owner?  Can you see how that conflicts with the whole PB side of it?  That someone can be a responsible dog owner if they spay/neuter their dog?

Don't get me wrong, I understand your point of view.  And I agree that the AKC should stick to their goals, but what are they?  Goals change with time.  Overpopulation is a problem and excluding mutts from their registry obviously isn't fixing the problem.  If they allow mixed breeds to compete that are fixed, like the ILP's, maybe THAT will help.  I dunno.

I found that survey to be quite obnoxious and most definitely NOT geared toward a mutt owner. Some of the questions were quite offensive to me as a mutt owner. Again it was not geared for mutt owners like me, but they should have considered that when making it, because WE are the people they're thinking about letting in. With that attitude from the outset, how do they expect us to even consider joining them if they even do agree to let us in?

 
as an owner of both purebreds (deliberately  NOT registered with AKC although they could have been) and mutts, I found that survey to be incredibly offensive. Clearly the only reason AKC is even considering this action is to increase their revenues.

Honestly I think a lot of this comes down to who exactly is going to utilize this new opening (if it happens).  Will it contribute to more designer dogs?  Frankly I don't think so.  People that do sports with their dogs are typically not part of the DD clan.  I don't think it will impact the DD world whatsoever other than a new tagline on their ad to say that their dogs could compete?  Really though....the average Joe perusing the newpaper ads could care less about that IMO.  I think that would be a short lived impact if at all.
 
I'm not a flyball person, but I would also venture to guess that the percentage of flyball folks actually crossing dogs for the sport is relatively small compared to the overall interest in the sport.  Can someone heavily involved with flyball speak to those numbers? 
 
I do think it's a bit of slippery slope for not necessarily acceptance, but possibly more reverance toward mixed breeds.  That in of itself does't seem like a crime, no.....however it can certainly impact the dog world in the big picture.  The ideal situation would be a world where mixed breeds are not the product of our own selfish disregard to animals and the resulting overpopulation problems. 
 
Speaking as someone heavily tied to their PB, who has owned rescue dogs and who shows, I do not look down on MB's in general nor shelter dogs of any kind.  Quite the opposite actually since any breed can be abused and/or neglected - I feel it as a dog person, not as a PB dog person!  However the fact is, MB dogs die by the literal millions because of our lack of responsibility.  I just don't know that focus on MB's by a PB registry will do those numbers any favors in the long-run. 
 
I also agree though, that the AKC has a lot of issues going on in regards to PB's as it is !!

Tash I am not seeing what the quote you isolated has to do with what you put under it?
 
AKC, IMO doesn't need a goal, a goal indicates there is an end result desired, a "finishing point". That's not what AKC is for, they have rather...a job to do and keep doing, until that job is either legislated out of exsistance, or the demand for the job is no longer there.
 
It is a registry...and they do have a job and responsibilties. Those being to maintain and ensure the integrity of a purebred dogs pedigree. To track and record breedings done of purebred dogs, and to further the interests of purebred dog enthusiasts.
 
They have branched out too much IMO from that purpose into arenas they should have no input on...health....breeding ethics...things that do no relate to keeping of records. PARENT CLUBS, and all breed clubs too, need to take back the responsibilities like breeding ethics, policing their own, rescue, health testing, even putting on shows, etc.
 
Now as you state...because of this branching out..people expect them to be responsible for and "take care of" pet overpopulation...BSL...etc etc etc. Things that have nothing to do with keeping records. They've shot themselves in the foot, haven't they? Had they stuck to keeping records..well would any of us be talking about this at all?
 
IMO things like overpopulation need to be addressed by non partisan dog owner groups that do NOT base membership around breed, or events, or titles AT ALL.
 
The biggest mistake the AKC has made is trying to be all things, to all dog owners. Instead of doing one or two things to the best of their ability...they are now wearing too many hats...and none of them fit!

ORIGINAL: mudpuppy

I found that survey to be quite obnoxious and most definitely NOT geared toward a mutt owner. Some of the questions were quite offensive to me as a mutt owner. Again it was not geared for mutt owners like me, but they should have considered that when making it, because WE are the people they're thinking about letting in. With that attitude from the outset, how do they expect us to even consider joining them if they even do agree to let us in?

as an owner of both purebreds (deliberately  NOT registered with AKC although they could have been) and mutts, I found that survey to be incredibly offensive. Clearly the only reason AKC is even considering this action is to increase their revenues.

If you have such a low opinion of the AKC why even take the survey? 

It SHOULD be geared towards the membership, because the members of the club should be the ones making decisions about the clubs future.  There are a LOT of AKC members who also have mixed breed dogs or who have had or will have mixed breed dogs--it's not like the AKC is only open to members who ONLY have purebreds.

Gina, I should have said their mission, not their goal.  As they state on that survey, it's to further the purebred dog and promote responsible dog ownership.  You left that first part out in the quote above, so based on your statement, the AKC promotes only responsible ownership of dogs.  Does that not include responsible ownership of any dog?  Or just the ones the AKC registers?

It is a registry...and they do have a job and responsibilties. Those being to maintain and ensure the integrity of a purebred dogs pedigree. To track and record breedings done of purebred dogs, and to further the interests of purebred dog enthusiasts.

And they will still do this even if they allow mutts to compete in non-conformation events.  The mutts will have to be fixed, just like any ILP'd dog.  Why ILP then?  What's the point?  Do you feel that was a mistake as well?

Sally, you're right. I probably shouldn't have taken it because there's a high likelyhood that I wouldn't participate anyway.  I hesitate to support anything that supports puppy mills like the AKC does.  However, I LOVE agility.  There are just as many AKC trials around as there are USDAA, more even in some cases, and the chance to compete more often would be grand!  It's about the game and me and my dog, not about the venue so much, so I guess that's why I did it, because I *might* do it...

Tash "I" am for responsible dog ownership and protecting our rights to have dogs...that's coming from me...not the AKC stated purpose...which has been amended since it's inception....again without polling the membership on that, either.
 
When concerns come up for legislation, cruelty, overpopulation, etc I turn to another group to address it and help out...not the AKC.
 
I happen to think spayed and neutered dogs of AKC documented parentage should be allowed to compete in conformation and attain titles. That IMO would do far more for "overpopulation" than this.
 
I am not ever going to be ashamed to love the purebred dog...and if someone else would like to take that for elitism so be it. I cannot control that...SOMEONE in the day and age of doodles and puggles needs to be "for" the purebred dog, because they are worth it...and dedicated solely to them. That used to be AKC...but now...who knows?

Oh trust me, I have my sights set on a Toller for my next agility dog.  From a breeder, where I get to see the parents and also all the requisite health testing.  Or I might rescue a border collie if my BF won't let me get the Toller.  He keeps complaining about the screaming part... sheesh. 

I guess I just don't see how allowing mixed breeds that are fixed, will cause problems.  And why am I even arguing it... lol.. I compete in USDAA and CPE and there are like 7 around here a year.    Guess I am leaning more towards giving it a try if they allow it.  My friends have PB's and keep telling me I could ILP my dogs as something...  [8|]  not sure what!  lol... but then I could trial year round because there are indoor AKC events in the winter whereas most of the other venues can't afford to rent an indoor facility.  Bummer too...

One thing to consider...and not being a performance person I have no idea how valid a concern this is...is the question of numbers.
 
Conformation events have been growing in size, as the list of AKC breeds increases, most conformation shows have a performance event...but there are only so many facilities anymore than allow dog shows...esp indoor nice ones. They all have their limits as to numbers..and smaller KC's esp might have issues with how to deal. There's already talk that "fewer shows, fewer places, but bigger" might be the wave of the future.
 
It's really hard to say how it would all eventually shake out. It may end up being that there'd be fewer performance events en toto simply because they'd become larger and well attended, and fewer facilties are around that can take those numbers. Or that entry fees would rise to cover the costs of larger facilities being needed. There's I guess also the possibility of harm to other smaller registries because of lack of attendance if enough people get "hooked" on AKC events...their frequency and all that. Would that be likely? Like I said I dunno....
 
Or nothing at all could change lol.
 
But all that being said...for me it's not an issue of problems or no problems...as it is a question of principle and "do fewer things better" over "do a bunch of stuff mediocre"

It may end up being that there'd be fewer performance events en toto simply because they'd become larger and well attended, and fewer facilties are around that can take those numbers.

 
With AKC agility, entries are capped.  330 runs per day per judge.  Entry 331 gets put on a wait list.  In my area you MUST get your AKC agility entry in the first week it opens for most trials.  I've spent quite a bit of $$$ overnighting entries.  One trial I know of used to fill in 15 minutes, and no, it wasn't Westminster, just an agility trial.  The only way to get in that trial was to hand deliver.  Things have changes a bit in this area, but most trials in this area fill.  If you're one of the first 5 or 10 on the wait list, you'll usually make it in.  The AKC has also changed some rules about how many entries in one envelope are allowed and (I think) has said hand delivery is not accepted any more.  Therefore, you're not looking at a large place, just more dogs not making it in the event. 
 
My tracking friends tell me that sport is even worse to try to enter. 
 
I don't know about OB or Rally in general, but the last one I entered didn't fill.  At least we were finished awfully early for it to have filled. 
 
 
 
Someone on a list I'm on brought up an interesting question.  If the AKC allows mixes to compete, what about nonAKC recognized purebred?   Hmmmmm.

From what I've been told, tracking trials cap at 10. One-oh. Ten.

I wonder if the entire system of performance events needs to be revamped.

I have not read the thread and skimmed just a few posts but imo...AKC stands for a registered breed of dogs.  If you want to compete in AKC competitions than buy and AKC recognized breed.   Otherwise find another dog competition to compete in.  Now that is just my take and I fully understand people wanting to show off the abilities of their canine companions but there must be another avenue they can take.

The way I look at it, allowing mixed breed to compete could really help our dog sports, AKC, AND Non AKC alike.

Agility, Obedience, Flyball, etc....they're ALL hurting for new blood. Honestly, how often do you see juniors competing in these events?

I See ONE Junior (Only ONE!) competing in agility here....and she's from my kennel club! I am the second youngest person running at any given trial (usually) at 21 years of age! Everybody else is pretty....um....well seasoned.

Look at many of the judges...they're getting up there.

Allowing people to compete with their mutts is a GREAT way to get some new blood, and some new YOUNG blood. They'll go to shows and check out all the other cool purebreds, and maybe conformation will catch their eye, or perhaps they'll end up being more drawn to obedience.

AKC trials are THE most abundant...it's very hard for people to get "into dogs" if they have a mutt, because UKC, NADAC, and USDAA trials from what I see are few and far between, and they usually require a good deal of travel in order to attend.

With AKC, I usually have to travel less than an hour one way in order to get to SEVERAL trials a year. I say open it up.

My only concern is that more people will begin breeding the "ultimate agility dog" aka...the Border Jack (Border Collie x Jack Russell...known for small size but TREMENDOUS speed). These crosses are very popular within NADAC circles from what I know...and they are quite the speed demons (I couldn't live with one)
 
As for tracking, it really IS a biznatch to try and enter >.< The limit is usually 10 dogs...some trials allow 12-15 (RARE) 330 dogs is also quite a lot...I went to an agility trial, was running a little Sheltie bitch in the 12 inch class....the 20" dogs took over TWO HOURS to run and judge.  And this is with the NEW rules of tighter timing schedules

330 dogs is also quite a lot

 
No, 330 runs per judge per day. Most people run in Standard and Jumpers class. And AKC has just added FAST class to agility.  So, think of 110 (or a little more since a few people will just run one or two classes) dogs.  NOT 330 dogs.  Either way, many two ring trials without FAST class fill or come very close in this area; one ring trials fill quickly and have long wait lists. 
 
110 dogs may sound like a lot, but if it fills in 2 days it should tell you there are LOTS of dogs wanting/waiting for the oppertunity to play.  And it's not going to help the AKC make $$ if the trials are already filled