Hi List,
The very fact that this dialogue going on is promising and I hope it will
bear fruit. On the basis of many conversations I've had over the years with
"pet-owners," I'd like to bring to your attention something "out of left
field." I raise this with all due respect (NOT to imply this is more
important, but to suggest yet another consideration! Oh no - I can just
hear the groans!).
Myra wrote, <<Actually, I would guess that the pet group who is opposed to
the registration of AKC dogs is huge, but the breeder group who is opposed
to AKC registration is relatively small.>> My guess is that Myra is right
about this (re the "pet group"), but for a *different reason* than what I've
read so far today (more on this in a second). Pam M and others may be right
that some pet-owners bought their dogs from anti-AKC breeders who
"brainwashed" them (my term, not Pam's), but obviously not all "old club"
breeders do that (mine didn't) and a few of us (pet owners who are CKCSC
members) are able to learn and think for ourselves anyway... So far my
experience is similar to Carol's -- most pet owners I've spoken to are
unaware or uninterested in the existence of (let alone the differences
between) the two clubs. Thanks in large part to reading these threads for
the almost 3 years I've been on this list, I think I *do* get the issue (the
basics, anyway!), and would vote for inclusion. But I wouldn't be at all
surprised if there just aren't enough pet-owners voting this way to make the
difference. (I am also comfortable with Patricia P's suggestion that <<all
breeding related issues should be voted on only by breeders>>.) Actually,
I'm afraid what may *ultimately* determine things is NOT pet-owners, and NOT
even a concern for dogs, but economics.
Getting to my point re the *different reason* for pet-owners' opposition to
AKC registration: (Disclaimer: I'm not a self-appointed spokesperson for
pet-owners!) IMHO, *one* reason why many pet-owners DO care about the "AKC
world," and why I think some of them might vote against inclusion, is their
*negative association* of AKC with its policy of granting AKC-registration
to a vast number of pet-shop puppies (and even some puppy-mill imports).
Yes, yes, I know AKC has been trying to tighten things up but it's doubtful
it will ever do so to the point that it no longer provides papers for
millers and brokers to wave before na�ve prospective buyers. Wouldn't it
lose too much revenue? That's why, in the eyes of what (I think) is a large
number of pet-owners (some of whom vote in CKSCS-USA), AKC is regarded as
being LESS about using its resources to protect breeds' wellbeing and MORE
about an unwillingness to risk (possibly) reducing its income, thanks in
part to the money from registrations -- even of the many puppies that reach
petshops and brokers. Have any AKC breeders told pet-owners they (or their
breed clubs) sent written protests, circulated petitions, threatened mass
resignations? I'm guessing this would result in overwhelming support by
many of those difficult pet-owners! But that's not going to happen either,
is it?
Many of you may dismiss this issue as irrelevant. Maybe that's because you
think it SHOULD be irrelevant. But if, as I'm guessing, this is an issue
which underlies the way many pet-owners are inclined to vote, and if the
outcome of that vote could affect any breeders' decisions, wouldn't it be
*realistic* to regard this as relevant? In any election, people often cast
votes on the basis of some underlying (and sometimes less-than-rational)
concern. By now, I have to wonder whether it really makes sense to assume
this has *nothing* to do with some pet-owners' reasons for opposition to
AKC-registration...
No one has to like what I'm bringing up here and some of you may proceed to
"shoot the messenger." But please, let's not talk about what "should" have
been, or focus only on why pet-owners are so misled or what they "should"
know, but on what IS and how to deal with it. One piece of reality IS:
Many (not all) pet-owners do go glassy-eyed if presented with the more
technical aspects of breeders' concerns, or when asked to follow the
political/bureaucratic inequities breeders can face with the two clubs.
BUT: Have you ever noticed that when you talk to "pet-people" about the
truth behind petshops and brokers, you get their attention!! Most educators
would agree that if you want to begin educating someone, you can best reach
them if you start by paying attention to what *that* person is already
concerned with, addressing it, and *then* expand from there. So, for
instance, if/when they bring up the fact that so many of *those* puppies are
AKC-registered and ask why they're not as good as your puppies since you're
AKC too, say something that *directly* responds to this concern. Even
saying (sincerely) that you're 'working for change from within' might help,
especially if you can elaborate on your efforts. If you talk about widening
the gene-pool and the benefits of breeding to any dog of your choice for
increased probabilities of health, long life, etc., fine (and Thank You for
taking the time to educate another pet-owner). Just be aware that to some
pet-owners this can feel, rightly or wrongly, like a very subtle change of
subject.
Most pet-owners will never become breeders, but I'd guess that *all*
breeders started out as pet-owners. So, it's unrealistic to expect most
pet-owners to see the issue through the eyes of breeders; instead, as long
as pet-owners still have a vote, it might be reasonable for more breeders to
try to set aside the "us versus them" mentality and be willing, on occasion,
to look through some pet-owners' eyes (not just the ones they agree with) in
order to find another way to communicate effectively.
If there's anyone who actually read this all the way through, I thank you -
and end here with apologies for the length of this message!
Alida
=========================================================
"Magic Commands":
to stop receiving mail for awhile, click here and send the email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=SET%20CKCS-L%20NOMAIL
to start it up gain click here:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=SET%20CKCS-L%20MAIL
E-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] for assistance.
Search the Archives... http://apple.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ckcs-l.html
All e-mail sent through CKCS-L is Copyright 2002 by its original author.
