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

ORIGINAL: Audrey_and_Aspen
I do NOT agree with AKC's idea that this might encourage mixed breed dog owners to have purebreds next by getting them beaten by the purebreds! Lol. If anyone truly loves dogs, he wants to HELP them, not just get some live toy!

So any dog that has not been "saved" is a live toy?  But the purebred people are the snobs, right? [8|][8|][8|]

ORIGINAL: sillysally
I think you might be taking this WAY too personally.  I have a mutt (probobly mostly pit bull, but we don't know) and a purebred and I have no issue with my Sally (who was my first dog, my cuddlebug, and my heart dog all the way) not being allowed to compete alongside Jack, who is from a good breeder and is a purebred lab. 

Then again I also don't try to take my Standardbred horse to Arabian horse shows and then pitch a fit when he is not allowed to enter.   Certain registries have their own rules and purposes, and I can choose to participate or not.  If I so badly wanted to show in Arabian horse shows, I'd get an Arabian horse.  I don't have an arabian horse so I'll participate in open shows if I wish to compete.  It's the same thing with dogs.  I just don't see why people's panties are in such a twist about an organization *gasp* doing what it was created to do, which is be an advocate for the purebred dog.

 
I am not seeing where I am taking anything personally here really. The AKC could cease to exist and it would not affect me one way or another.. If this is the same AKC that had to be stopped dead in its tracks by the parent clubs from selling its registry paperwork to people who choose to purchase puppies from Petland then I also have my doubts about the AKC's claim to being an advocate of the purebred dog....

ORIGINAL: zircon

ORIGINAL: sillysally
I think you might be taking this WAY too personally.  I have a mutt (probobly mostly pit bull, but we don't know) and a purebred and I have no issue with my Sally (who was my first dog, my cuddlebug, and my heart dog all the way) not being allowed to compete alongside Jack, who is from a good breeder and is a purebred lab. 

Then again I also don't try to take my Standardbred horse to Arabian horse shows and then pitch a fit when he is not allowed to enter.   Certain registries have their own rules and purposes, and I can choose to participate or not.  If I so badly wanted to show in Arabian horse shows, I'd get an Arabian horse.  I don't have an arabian horse so I'll participate in open shows if I wish to compete.  It's the same thing with dogs.  I just don't see why people's panties are in such a twist about an organization *gasp* doing what it was created to do, which is be an advocate for the purebred dog.

I am not seeing where I am taking anything personally here really. The AKC could cease to exist and it would not affect me one way or another.. If this is the same AKC that had to be stopped dead in its tracks by the parent clubs from selling its registry paperwork to people who choose to purchase puppies from Petland then I also have my doubts about the AKC's claim to being an advocate of the purebred dog....

"Or if I were to get an ILP # for her but not for him well, I would feel that I had somehow betrayed him. I mean, this is like canine segregation, if I understand correctly."

"this would be like having two adopted children, one of whom would be allowed to play in the Little League and the other not."

Well this explains why the great unwashed with non-PBs are not exactly pounding on the AKC's door to be able to compete with our dogs.
There are other venues.
The AKC missed the boat on this one.
Not only that, they are alienating their own hard-core defenders with some of their own ideas to raise revenues.
Easier for me to pick one organization than two. Especially of "one of the two" wants to exclude the animal with more talent.

Back to the original post that started this thread.
It is interesting that I see this post from the web blog.  The owner of the blog also posted the same entry to a Yahoo Obedience group.  The post generated much of the same heated discussion that I saw in the thread.  I will note however that extensive fact checking was done with the AKC, the  national Golden retriever club, and USDAA concerning much of the information contained in the blog and there was, well shall we say many inconsistancies were found.

Just wanted to point out... the author of the blog in the OP, "Ch OTCH3 Miss Ginger", has been kicked off of several other websites for stealing pictures and posting them as her dog. She has also been caught lying about/greatly exaggerating her titles. I'm also fairly certain she doesn't compete with her dogs much at all.

You can Google her dog's titles, her alleged training company, her rescue organization, the kennel where she supposedly got her dog... NOTHING. You can check the AKC, Golden Club, the organizations she claims to compete with.. NOTHING. Most of it is made up. You can also do an image search for the breeds she claims to have, and many of the pictures are stolen off of other websites. 

And I know she is a member here... but I would and have said this to her face. I wouldn't put ANY stock in what she has to say.

I can see the mark of not wanting to energize more "architect" canines. It's an extreme call to make. From one perspective, this may assist more blended breeds in protecting dogs get taken on as individuals see they can contend in AKC execution with them too. On the other, one reason now to deter individuals from getting costly little dog plant originator canines is that they can't be AKC enrolled and contend in execution through AKC. Thanks to Lowes Survey

Helped me complete this incredible survey to win $500

However, in the end, I don't think the originator canine thing will be managed by taking the "thoroughbred/blended breed" course since it is particularly tricky. The most effective way to handle it is through training on the issues of overpopulation, doggy factories, and lawn rearing.