AKC Puppy Mill Support

By Tracey Fulmer,
Director, KBT Foundation
September 21, 2006

So it's clear the AKC has always been behind the scenes of the pet store trade, and certainly the BYB business, since that's where their revenues have historically come from. Just because that's how they've always run their business doesn't make it right. And it certainly isn't right for an organization claiming to be the "the dog's champion". In fact, it's just plain WRONG. Their thinking regarding Petland is a huge mistake, but that's clearly the decision the AKC made when they approved their strategic plan.

They're now executing that plan to woo back the puppy millers and pet stores. They've been a back-page premium advertiser in Kennel Spotlight magazine, the puppy mill trade rag published by the largest dog auction house, and a Platinum Sponsor of a miller trade organization. They've allowed anybody with an AKC registered dog to advertise litters on their own web site, and many of these advertisers are known puppy millers with no ethical breeding programs. And now Petland. But we should have all seen this coming when that High Volume Breeder/puppy mill report was published. The Petland deal just brought their plan out from under the covers, where I'm sure they would prefer it stay. What's next -- settng up a puppy factory in Missouri, in conjunction with Hunte and Petland, to spit out AKC-branded pups?

Their strategy: keep driving demand for purebreds, without a care about where the dogs come from or where they land (e.g., in shelters), while pretending to perform inspections, in an effort to drive revenues and recoup their old market position. Their mission isn't at all in the best interest of the dogs, and it never was. It's in the best interest of the purebred dog business, which the hobby breeders have never been in. The hobby breeders are simply the marketing arm of the AKC -- they use the dog shows on TV to portray a quality image that spurs demand of purebred pups (sold by pet stores and BYBs and registered by the AKC and others). Think about how many puppy buyers, now told that their dog is registered by the premium registry -- the AKC -- will decide to breed their premium dog? No impact on pet overpopulation? I beg to differ.

What the AKC's strategic planners and board of directors didn't factor in to the revenue equation is that awareness of puppy mill horrors and the pet overpopulation problem is gaining momentum. The internet and TV media are bringing this to light with gruesome pictures and facts. While some try to dismiss this as propaganda, unfortunately it isn't and we all know it. Many of our mill rescues are AKC registered, including those from Shelbina sold by one of the most notorious and largest pet store suppliers of Kerries and other breeds. Surely this mill with over 800 dogs was inspected by the AKC. How did they miss the bright red orbs where eyes were supposed to be, Shelby's gaping hole, oozing green infections and eyes matted shut? Is this the AKC version of quality, integrity and leadership?

So while their registrations and revenues may see some rebound over the next few years, as more and more people become aware of puppy mills and the pet overpopulation problem, the AKC's image will be damaged beyond repair before they know what hit them. There is no escaping those sickening puppy mill pictures, nor the hundred thousand homeless faces pleading for their lives everyday on petfinder.com, approximately 25% of them purebred. No amount of spin can cover that up. The Petland deal will be perceived as supporting and legitimizing the pet store business and their hideous puppy mill suppliers. I bet Petland is jumping for joy at the home run they scored. But just wait and see, those Petland boycotts will be going stronger than ever and I have no doubt who will win that war over the next few years. By deploying this strategy, the AKC is effectively putting itself out of business. Congratulations. If the AKC stood up for what is right, maybe purebred dogs wouldn't be as politically incorrect as they have become. And maybe AKC purebreds would be differentiated from the sham registry purebreds. Whatever happened to Roger Carras, the Westminster announcer who used to suggest we get a purebred then go to a shelter to adopt a second? That was the right thing to do.

Since the AKC has made the decision to take low road, that leaves the door open for an organization willing to become an ethical, top notch dog fancy. The American Border Collie Association (http://www.americanbordercollie.org/) has done just that, promoting their breed and educating the public, maintaining their registry (with DNA and required genetic testing), and managing events like agility and herding. And what about the UKC? How can they manage to do what's right, without economies of scale, while the AKC can't? Seems like a huge, missed, opportunity for the AKC -- the one organization with the perceived leadership and credibility (incorrectly perceived as it is) to make a difference in the lives of thousands of dogs in puppy mill hell. But they chose to take the opposite route, to support and legitimize that misery, to deal with the devil.
I would hope reputable breeders start to consider options other than the AKC, to strip away the image of quality the AKC gleans form those breeders working to improve their breeds rather than make a quick buck. In one post a while back, somebody wrote that the clubs ARE the AKC. Who with an ounce of conscience or love of dogs is willing to accept a trophy or ribbon knowing it was subsidized by one of their own breed suffering in caged hell?
Or perhaps the AKC still has an opportunity to change its chosen course.

Couldn't they be effective as a smaller organization, leveraging their leadership by standing for quality, integrity and education? Should they change their mission to allow consideration of this scenario? Would too many people lose their jobs? Are they just too greedy, trying to be everything to everybody but standing for nothing?
Couldn't they tighten up their finances and shed unnecessary expenses, e.g., the Museum of the Dog, their excessive payroll, their high rent headquarters in NY?

Couldn't they spend more on education of responsible dog ownership vs. promotion of the AKC itself. e.g., in Kennel Spotlight magazine or their "brand image" TV commercials?

Would the responsible fancy pay more to participate in the conformation, obedience, agility, herding, etc. events to make up for some portion of the loss in registration revenue?

Seems to me the AKC was at a crossroads and they chose the wrong path. Unless the AKC rethinks its plan, the Humane Society of the US and others will continue to pick up responsibility for the public education and rescue role, and it won't be in support of the purebred dog. That train has left the station and it's picking up steam: facts and pictures will always speak louder than slick advertising and transparent spin.