High Volume Breeder = "Puppy Mill"?

Recent articles splashed all over the internet charge that AKC derives most of it's income from "puppy mills". In searching for the demographics involved with AKC registrations, I found this statement from AKC:

"The vast majority of persons who register litters with the AKC are hobby and show breeders. In recent years, more than two-thirds of all persons who register a litter with the AKC, registered only one litter that year and more than 85 percent registered only two litters a year. Litters registered by these small hobby and show breeders account for more than half of all puppies in litters registered by the AKC. On the other hand, persons registering 10 or more litters in a year with the AKC, account for only 2 percent of our litter registrants and only about 20 percent of the puppies in AKC registered litters. Constituency of the AKC, therefore, is primarily hobby & show breeders."

(USDA Animal Welfare Listening Session, March 23, 2005)

This certainly sheds some much-needed light on these false claims of AKC being supported primarily by puppy mills.

So, what is a "puppy mill" anyway?


Surprise! There IS no definition for "puppy mill", because this is a hateful phrase conjured up by people who abhor ALL dog breeders. Some of us believe, for the term "puppy mill", that....much like the word "pornography"...well, we may not be able to define it, but we sure as hell know it when we see it. And this is how the haters view dog breeders. To them, we are canine pornographers.

The derogatory epithet "puppy mill" evokes images of neglectful "Greeders"; breeding for profit only, with no concern for the health and socialization of their charges; housing matted, dirty dogs that never leave wire cages; and dumping the older dogs that have lost their usefulness. How am I doing so far? Pornographic enough for you?

Yes, there are some very few breeders who do fit the above stereotype. Sad, but true. However, substandard care is not just unethical, it's illegal; and such breeders can and should be put out of business. The vast majority of breeders don't operate like this. We love our dogs and treat them well. We feel this is the least we can do to repay their loyal friendship.

Gina Spadafori, a PetConnection blogger, recently wrote an inflammatory article in which she equates high volume breeders with "puppy mills", and castigates AKC for perceived support of these breeders. OK, then on to the next logical question: What is a "high volume breeder"?

Let's see now. AKC defines "high volume breeder" as someone who registers more than six litters per year. Is everyone who is a "HVB" the equivalent of a "puppy mill"? Should AKC refuse to register dogs from everyone who breeds more than six litters per year?

How could that possibly by justifiable? I know many wonderful hobby breeders who fall into this "high volume breeder" category. Many successful icons in their respective breeds produce more than six litters per year. They certainly do not deserve to be slurred with the nasty label "puppy mill".

AKC can and does revoke privileges for those who operate in a substandard manner. No, they don't (and can't) get EVERYBODY. But they are the only registry that routinely conducts inspections. Nearly 6000 of them, every year.

The AKC baby shouldn't be thrown out with the bath water. A strong national dog organization is important for all of us, and essential to the very survival of dogs and our breeds as we now know them. AKC may not get everything right, but, like all of us, continually evolves as it grapples with the important canine issues of the day.

"We're more than Champion Dogs. We're the Dog's Champion." I like that motto!

The Coton de Tulear AKC debate

Recently I received a Coton newsletter that denigrates AKC. It implies that AKC affiliation brings with it popularity, proliferation in so-called "puppy mills" and dogs entering shelters in large numbers. These sorts of claims are patently false.


Approximately 50 AKC breeds are truly rare. Some of these register less than 50 dogs per year. Sussex spaniel, English Foxhound, Puli, Otterhound, Dandie Dinmont terrier...these are rare breeds. On the other hand, there are hundreds, perhaps thousands, of Coton breeders in existence. Cotons became popular without any involvement by AKC, and will continue to grow in popularity as they are promoted on breeder websites and exhibited in most all venues other than AKC. They are cute and cuddly and will continue to grow in popularity. Look out if Disney decides to feature a Coton in a movie! Now THAT would exponentially increase the popularity of the Coton.

This statement about breed acceptance into the AKC was recently made publicly by a Coton Club president:

"The number of abandoned Cotons waiting to die in shelters will add to the 7,600 AKC Registered dogs that are killed in America's shelters every single day."

A quick computation based on this statement...

7600 AKC dogs per day X 365 days in a year =

2.8 million AKC registered dogs killed by shelters every year.

This claim is absurd. Right now, AKC registers less than a million dogs per year. As a matter of fact, all the registrations from all US registries combined, don’t add up to 2.8 million dogs per year.

Shelters are not filling up with AKC registered dogs, or for that matter, with purebred dogs in general. The vast majority of intakes are mixed breeds.

If the Coton community wants to remain independent of AKC, that is certainly their right. However, make the decision based on facts, instead of lies, hype and hyperbole.

Here are some FACTS to ponder about AKC:

AKC is the ONLY registry to conduct regular inspections of high-volume breeders. A high-volume breeder is defined as one who registers more than six litters per year. AKC is not opposed to breeders who comply with current laws and meet USDA health and welfare requirements. However, if substandard conditions are found on inspection, the breeder will lose AKC privileges and may also be reported to local authorities. Every month there are published reports of breeders whose conditions were found to be substandard and who therefore have lost AKC privileges for a specified period of time….MANY YEARS. Usually ten years.

AKC is officially opposed to dog auctions, but is present where such activities are legally conducted in order to assure that registrations and transfers are accurately recorded. AKC further recommends that rescue groups do not support auctions by purchasing dogs at these events. AKC does not at this time oppose retail sales that are legally conducted. They are under extreme pressure from most of their member clubs to change that position….and most (if not all) AKC member clubs include prohibition in their codes of ethics of selling to pet stores or placing dogs by raffle or auction.

AKC registrations have declined dramatically over the past 15 years. This is due in large part to the proliferation of new registries such as APRI, CKC etc. Despite the drop in revenues, AKC continues to support the Canine Health Foundation, breeder educational seminars, the Canine Health Information Center, and the canine legislation department.

The legislation department is essential to the future of all dogs, as so-called “puppy mill” bills are rearing their ugly heads around the country. Virginia, Louisiana, Washington and Oregon all now limit the number of intact animals that may be kept. In some areas in Oregon, a breeder is considered to be “commercial” if he owns just 10 intact dogs. AKC considers anyone who registers more than six litters per year a "high volume breeder". Is such a breeder a “puppy mill”? Ridiculously, many people seem to believe so. Other states are attempting to institute similar restrictions on dog ownership.

AKC member clubs (breed parent clubs) all have codes of ethics which are individually drafted and may also address breed-specific concerns. These are considered to be guidelines for good practice…most address breeding, sales and sportsmanship… and thankfully, most are not set in stone. The individual clubs are responsible for implementing their codes of ethics as well as drawing up their own breed standards. In the final analysis, no registry or club can realistically guarantee compliance with all points in their codes of ethics.

Dog owners who neglect and abuse dogs are already breaking current animal welfare laws that exist in every state. Most often, these sort of people do not belong to any certain club or registry. Perhaps if they did, and had to submit to inspections we would see less neglect and abuse. Generally, the worst offenders of dog neglect and abuse are the ones who operate outside the mainstream confines of clubs, registries and the law.

When people refuse to patronize substandard breeders, they will disappear. Meanwhile, don't try to blame AKC for their existence. It's an argument that just doesn't hold water.

Breed specific legislation-Arkansas

The City of Hot Springs, Arkansas is voting on a breed specific law this coming Tuesday, December 1st. Bad idea. Worse than that, terrible idea. Why? Here's what I wrote to the city directors, Chamber of Commerce and Visitors Bureau:

No breed is inherently aggressive. Unacceptable behavior of individual DOGS, not breeds, is caused by OWNERS, whether through abuse or training or neglect. Owners. The breed itself is not relative. Statistically, smaller dogs are the most frequent biters, and in the majority of cases, victims are family members, typically children, who have never been taught that animals are not toys.

Other than the fact that I would no longer participate in Arkansas’ dog shows should these laws go into effect, my residency in another state is irrelevant. What matters is that breed specific legislation does nothing to change the actions of irresponsible or oblivious owners. The only result of such laws, every time, everywhere and in every situation, is that a large group of innocent dogs is condemned to death by virtue of its appearance.

Is that really your intention?>

If you agree, by all means let Hot Springs know, but be wary of your own legislature too. If they haven't passed a similar law already, you might want to keep track and make sure they don't. All of these anti-pet laws result in the deaths of more dogs. The opposition will tell you different, but the statistics prove it's true. Every community, town, every city, every state, everywhere that has or had breed specific laws, mandatory spay/neuter laws, limit laws...etc., ends up killing more dogs.

Coton de True Liar

There is a debate raging in the Coton de Tulear community about whether or not the breed should seek AKC recognition. The prevailing attitude among the fanciers in this breed seems to be that AKC recognition will induce popularity for the breed, which in turn will cause them to be bred in so-called "puppy mills" and consequently end up in droves in animals shelters. I read this statement in a recent issue of an online Coton magazine, regarding the effects of AKC breed acceptance:

"The number of abandoned Cotons waiting to die in
shelters will add to the 7,600 AKC Registered dogs that are killed in America's
shelters every single day."

Hmmm.....some quick math and we see that 2.8 million AKC registered dogs are killed by shelters every year! Oops, just one pesky little detail, AKC doesn't even register that many dogs in a year! In 2007, AKC registered just 400,000 litters, and slightly over 800,000 individual dogs.

http://www.breedingbetterdogs.com/articles/pdf/ticket_to_ride.pdf

There is certainly no data to support that number of purebred dogs entering our shelters, much less to state that they are all killed! Estimates (figuring on the high end) are that shelters kill roughly 2 million dogs per year, and an even higher number of cats. But according to the author, (president of a Coton club for over 30 years) more AKC registered dogs are dying than the total number of ALL dogs killed. Huh??

I hope his PhD isn't in math. We'd have to have every dog from every purebred registry in the US lined up to enter the shelters directly from their whelping boxes, and we'd still need more "victims" to meet this wildly overblown claim.

Fact is, there are NO reliable nationwide shelter statistics, no central reporting agency, there are only estimates. Who compiles the statistics? The very people who want to inflate the numbers for dramatic effect! The AR kooks of PETA and HSUS.

Shelters have no way of knowing if a dog is truly purebred, much less registered. However, if THOUGHT to be purebred, breed rescues normally will take these dogs. We have had shelters call our breed rescue, only to find that the dogs are mixed and do not remotely resemble specimens of our breed!! We often take them regardless. These dogs are probably listed in someone's statistics book as being purebred.

This study of shelters nationwide lists the numbers of purebred dogs entering shelters at just 5 percent:

http://petpopulation.org/RELINQ207-223.pdf

A similar previous survey found the percent of purebred dogs in shelter intakes at 7.3 percent (reported by Nassar, Talboy, and Moulton, 1992, American Humane Association). These numbers relate to intakes, not deaths. Naturally the death numbers are much lower. And, happily, all shelter numbers have been steadily declining for years!

The facts are that we have SHORTAGES of adoptable dogs in the New England states, and in parts of California like San Diego and San Francisco. The facts are that there are many groups importing shelter dogs from Europe, the Caribbean, Mexico and China.

If the Coton breeders prefer to keep the breed somewhat an exclusive commodity that is certainly their prerogative. But own up to the real reasons! It is disingenuous to blame AKC for all the ills of the dog world. The rhetoric I am hearing is that AKC acceptance will substantially increase popularity and, by further extrapolation, that the breed will be “ruined” by this newfound popularily.

Heck, we have people ruining breeds just fine on their own, without the help of any registry. However, AKC is the ONLY registry that conducts breeder inspections...close to 6,000 every year....and AKC spends an inordinate amount of resources on breeder education, legislative efforts, and their Canine Health Foundation. What evil curs!

Next point, AKC registration does not necessarily induce popularity. There are about 50 breeds within the AKC that have such low registration rates that they are considered REAL rare breeds. Dandie Dinmont Terriers. Now THAT’s a rare breed. Pulis, PBGVs, Mudis, harriers, Otterhounds etc….all are rare. The English Foxhound is the rarest AKC breed right now. Google "Coton de Tulear" and literally thousands of breeder websites will appear, all around the globe. The breed is not “rare” at all, but is priced accordingly. What a great marketing tool!

What contributes to a breed's popularity is usually the underlying "cute" factor, or the overall appeal of the breed. A breed with gentle disposition, soft coat, small size, and pretty colors will be popular. No matter where it is registered, if it is purebred, or if it is a mix of the "Poo" variety. Cotons are already in pet stores, and bred commercially. So that ship has long ago sailed. They are popular.

The very people claiming that they don’t want the Coton to become popularized, are the ones who have websites promoting the breed. They claim that the world of AKC dog shows has ruined many a breed, yet check out their websites...... they participate in plenty of dog shows, earning titles and enjoying bragging rights…and boy, do they brag.

Several Coton breeders had exhibits set up at the Pet Expo just this past May, some with puppies on display. These are the same people with websites touting their champions and extolling the virtues of the breed. The very people claiming that they don't want their breed to be popularized!

Well, no need to cloud the issue with facts. Coton breeders will continue to rationalize and insult others in a desperate attempt to maintain their status quo. Who gives a flying fig where Cotons (or ANY dogs) are registered, or even IF they are registered?

Just don't throw stones at AKC when you live in a glass ARBA house.